Permeable composition, controlled release product and methods for the production thereof

ABSTRACT

A permeable composition, a controlled release product, and methods for producing the permeable composition and controlled release product. The permeable composition includes a matrix material, a particulate filler material, and interfacial passageways between the matrix material and the particles of filler material. The matrix material may include a substrate material and a carrier material. The controlled release product is formed by coating a substrate material with at least one layer of the permeable composition. The methods include the steps of applying a degradable surface treatment material to the particles of filler material and then dispersing the surface treated filler material throughout the matrix material so that degradable interfaces are provided between the matrix material and the particles of filler material.

FIELD OF INVENTION

The present invention relates to a permeable composition and a methodfor the production thereof. The permeable composition may be comprisedof a substrate material. Alternately, the permeable composition may befor use in coating a substrate material. Further, the present inventionrelates to a controlled release product comprised of the permeablecomposition and a method for the production thereof.

BACKGROUND OF INVENTION

Release control is desirable in numerous applications and in variousfields. For instance, release control is often utilized or sought afterin applications relating to fertilizers, pesticides and pharmaceuticals.In general terms, “release” is used to refer to the exposure of anoriginally contained agent, substrate or matter, referred to herein asthe “substrate material,” to the surrounding environment. The release ofthe substrate material is facilitated by a releasing medium (such as asolvent) and a releasing process (such as dissolution orbiodegradation).

Further, “control” refers to the ability to affect the release of thesubstrate material. The definition of control includes the manipulationof various release variables, including, but not limited to, the amountof substrate material released and the release rate. Extension of therelease control concept to an appropriate application implies thatvariable release profiles can be attained through adjustment of therelease control technique. “Release profile” refers to the correlationbetween the amount of substrate material released and time.

In addition to permitting variability with respect to the releaseprofile, it is also desirable that the release control technique be bothreliable and cost effective. Reliable release control refers to atechnique that is not unduly or significantly influenced byenvironmental conditions (such as temperature, abrasive handling, etc.),thereby inducing an unpredictable release of the substrate material.

Generally, the release control techniques conventionally utilized andemployed in various applications have not been found to be fullysatisfactory. For instance, these release control techniques are oftennot conducive to variable or adjustable release control or suchvariability is limited. Further, these techniques may not be reliable,therefore limiting the ability to attain a predictable release. Finally,these techniques may not be cost effective, thereby inhibiting theirwidespread usage.

As indicated, release control techniques are applicable to numerousapplications and fields. Agriculture represents one such application inwhich release control has become increasingly important. Moreparticularly, in recent decades, food producers have instituted moreefficient farming techniques designed to better utilize agriculturalresources. As higher demands are placed on agricultural production,growers have increasingly focused upon improving crop yields.Consequently, by way of example, fertilizers capable of providing cropswith critical nutrients have become an integral tool in attempts tooptimize crop yields.

Basic fertilizers are comprised of rapidly degradable chemical compoundsthat are released, almost immediately as nutrient forms suitable forplant uptake. This conversion is generally performed by simpledissolution or natural soil degradation processes. The unabated nutrientrelease characteristic of these basic rapid release fertilizers tends tohave several disadvantages. First, fertilizer costs are typicallyincreased due to the inefficient nutrient supply. Generally, the initialrate of nutrient release from basic fertilizers is much higher than therate of plant uptake. Consequently, a significant amount of fertilizernutrients are susceptible to losses (i.e.: wasted) such as soilimmobilization, leaching by rainfall, or volatilization into theatmosphere.

Second, basic fertilizers have difficulty achieving optimum plantnutrition. In order to compensate for a lack of release control andnutrient losses from basic rapid release fertilizers, growers tend torely on high application rates or multiple applications in an attempt tomeet crop nutritional requirements. Growers must also adjust fertilizerapplication rates to account for variable soil conditions or cropdemand. Using such practices, it is difficult to ensure crops areneither deficiently nor excessively fertilized. Without optimum plantnutrition, crop yields cannot be maximized.

Third, the resulting need for multiple fertilizer applications tends toincrease labor and equipment maintenance costs and operating time.Fourth, besides being unavailable for future stages of plant growth,lost nutrient chemicals can pose a potential environmental hazard. Oncepresent in surface or subsurface drinking water supplies, leached plantnutrients may become contaminants. In the case of nitrogen basedfertilizers, volatilization contributes to the amount of NO and NOemissions in the atmosphere. Fifth, excess released nutrients notconsumed by environmental losses may actually be toxic to plants,particularly seedlings sensitive to soil chemistry. Such plant damage isgenerally referred to as crop “burning.”

Therefore, there is a need in agriculture for controlled releasefertilizer products and permeable fertilizer compositions capable ofaddressing the disadvantages of basic fertilizers which tend to have norelease control. Specifically, there is a need for fertilizer productsand compositions able to provide improved crop nutrition achievedthrough variable, controlled nutrient supplies capable of meetingdisparate crop demands. Ideally, the fertilizer product or compositionprovides the correct amount of nutrients at the correct rate over all ora portion of the growing season. Further, there is a need to reducefertilizer costs associated with fertilizer losses and multipleapplications. Finally, there is a need to reduce environmental damageattributable to fertilizer nutrient losses and crop damage attributableto excessive fertilizer chemical concentrations in the soil.

Various attempts have been made to address the deficiencies of basicfertilizers. Specifically, the fertilizer industry has created numerousmodified fertilizer products and compositions, which can be classifiedunder the broad categories of “stabilized fertilizers” and “controlledrelease fertilizers.” The term stabilized fertilizer is used to refer toa fertilizer amended with a chemical inhibitor designed to slow orsuppress the natural soil processes responsible for converting thefertilizer into plant usable nutrients (“Controlled-Release andStabilized Fertilizers in Agriculture,” Dr. Martin Trenkel,International Fertilizer Industry Association, December 1997, p. 12).

Controlled release fertilizers are generally described as eitheruncoated or slowly degradable fertilizers or coated or encapsulatedfertilizers. Generally speaking, uncoated or slowly degradablefertilizers tend to be chemically modified and rendered more resistantto the natural soil degradation mechanisms. For coated or encapsulatedfertilizers, a permeable or porous coating composition is typicallyadded to the surface of solid fertilizer granules in order to slow waterinfiltration into the soluble nutrient core. Many of the currentlycommercially available controlled release fertilizers release nutrientsin a gradual fashion. That is, they possess release profiles with aslower release rate than basic rapid release fertilizers. However, thesefertilizers typically do not utilize any appreciable release controltechnique. Therefore, release profile variations are difficult orimpossible to attain.

Fertilizers possessing controlled release properties without the use ofa governing coating are typically classified into three generalcategories. First, “low or limited solubility fertilizers” includeconventional soluble fertilizers that have been chemically modified toproduce a new fertilizer compound of reduced solubility. Second, “matrixfertilizers” are comprised of granules including nutrient compoundsdispersed throughout a binder or carrier material of typically lownutrient value. Although matrix fertilizers are common, they tend to beof relatively low commercial value. This is largely attributable to thefact that, generally, a substantial quantity of low nutrient valuebinder is required to form the granule. Consequently, the finishedproduct tends to have a low nutrient quantity per unit weight offertilizer. Third, “supergranules” are slow release fertilizers providedin the form of large briquettes or sticks and rely upon a low surfacearea/volume ratio to delay the complete dissolution of the fertilizer.Supergranules provide no appreciable control over nutrient releaseprofiles and are generally used in insignificant quantities.

Urea-formaldehyde is the primary “low or limited solubility fertilizer”in use today. The formation of urea-formaldehyde is achieved by reactingurea with formaldehyde under controlled conditions (temperature, time,pH, etc.) to form methylene urea polymers of various chain lengths. Theinitial nitrogen release from urea-formaldehyde products is associatedwith the dissolution of unreacted urea (usually less than 15% of thefertilizer nitrogen content). Before the remainder of the urea in thefertilizer can be released, soil microbes must first break down thepolymers, thereby making additional urea available for dissolution. Thelonger the polymers, the longer the degradation time required to freethe urea from the polymer chains. Therefore, some attenuation of thenitrogen release profile can be achieved through varying the decree ofpolymerization of the methylene ureas. Urea-formaldehyde products areavailable in granule and liquid forms

However, there are several important disadvantages associated with theuse of urea-formaldehyde products. First, urea-formaldehyde productstend to be approximately three to five times as expensive as urea.Second, urea-formaldehyde contains about 38% nitrogen. However, some ofthe nitrogen contained in very long polymers may be released after thegrowing season, or not at all. Finally, formaldehyde is a toxicmaterial. Health concerns associated with the handling of formaldehydein production processes and the usage of products made fromformaldehyde, have been raised.

Two additional low or limited solubility urea-based fertilizers are alsoknown. The first is isobutylidene diurea (IBDU®—32% nitrogen). IBDU® isformed via a reaction with urea and isobutyraldehyde, resulting in theformation of a single oligomer (very short chain polymer). The releaserate of IBDU® is largely influenced by its particle size, where asmaller granule corresponds to a faster release rate. The second iscrotonylidene diurea (CDU®—32.5% nitrogen). CDU® is a low solubilityurea compound formed by a reaction of urea and acetic aldehyde. As withIBDU®, the nitrogen release rate of CDU® is determined largely byparticle size.

Commercially available “matrix fertilizers” typically employ the use ofdegradable polymer matrices to carry nutrients such as nitrate,phosphate and potassium compounds. The matrix approach is seldom usedfor highly concentrated fertilizers, such as urea, because the carriermaterial may comprise as much as 40%, by weight of the total fertilizer.Generally, only low-grade fertilizers, such as NPK 10-10-10(nitrogen—10%, phosphorous—10%, potassium—10%), are produced using thematrix approach.

Generally speaking, the various materials typically indicated to besuitable for fertilizer matrices are low solubility, insoluble ordegradable substances, such as elemental sulphur, manure, apatite(calcium phosphate crystals), rock fines (and other minerals) andthermoplastic resins and cellulose. These low nutrient value matrixmaterials can comprise 10–90%, by weight of the “fertilizer.” However,the majority of these matrix fertilizers are of relatively low-value. Inaddition, the matrix fertilizers may provide slower release than a lowsolubility fertilizer but they do not typically have the capacity tomaintain a significant release of nutrients over extended periods oftime. The slow release properties of matrix fertilizers result from thefact that the matrix must be (dissolved/degraded or water must migratethrough the matrix to release the nutrients contained. As such, thematrix approach to slow release fertilizers provides limited control ofthe nutrient release rate.

U.S. Pat. No. 4,589,903 (Sato et. al.) describes a process involvingdissolving synthetic wollastonite in concentrated sulphuric acid andblending the solution with various types of manure. The mixture isgranulated and allowed to ferment. The low quality pellets can then beapplied as fertilizers containing relatively low quantities of nutrientsand a large number of beneficial microorganisms. The wollastonite andmanure form the matrix of the granules.

U.S. Pat. No. 5,653,782 (Stern et. al.) describes a process by whichfertilizer particles are preheated to a temperature in excess of themelting point of sulphur, prior to being mixed with solid sulphurprills. The superheated fertilizer melts the sulphur, and as the mixtureis agitated in a pugmill, the fertilizer is “coated.” Although the termcoating is used extensively throughout the patent, it only refers tocoating the particles prior to agglomeration. The resulting fertilizeris comprised of fertilizer particles contained in a sulphur matrix.Accordingly, this process is only suitable for coating those fertilizerscapable of withstanding temperatures in excess of the melting point ofsulphur (120° C.) in a range of 130–280° C. Many fertilizers would meltor volatilize under such conditions. Urea, for example, melts at 132° C.

Further, the matrix fertilizer may contain a fibrous medium able toabsorb water into the granule core thereby dissolving and releasingnutrients (or a herbicide) carried by the fibres. The fibrous materialmay be an organic medium (cellulose). U.S. Pat. No. 5,471,786 (Clausen)describes the use of a fibrous medium containing a mineral. Themineralized organic material is lignite, consisting of peat (organic)and carbonaceous mineral (coal). The hydrophilic properties of theligite make the product a suitable plant growing medium. The “plantingblocks” are capable of retaining moisture even in conditions of dry soiland low water table.

Finally, absorptive cellulose fibers may be impregnated with plantnutrients and the resulting fibers subsequently bound in a matrix. Onceplaced in the soil, the moisture and nutrients stored in the fibers maybe released. Some of these products may possess degradable coatings inorder to prevent premature leaching, but they are not designed toregulate the release of nutrients. As such, these products may have someslow release properties but without the ability to significantly adjustthe release profile. The “fertilizers” produced also contain lowquantities of nutrients per unit weight, due to the presence of largequantities of carrier fibers and binders.

In contrast, coated or encapsulated fertilizers involve the applicationof a coating to a substrate material typically comprised of a solid,granular fertilizer. In practice, encapsulated fertilizers tend to beclassified according to the composition of the coating. The mostcommonly used coating compositions are sulphur, synthetic polymers and acombination of sulphur and synthetic polymers.

Current commercially available sulphur coated fertilizer (“SCF”)generally consists of a water soluble or degradable fertilizerencapsulated by a sulphur coating, a sealant coating and typically aconditioner. Although the nutrient release from SCF tends to be slowerthan the release from basic fertilizers, the initial rate of nutrientrelease is often still considered to be too rapid. Therefore, it isdesirable to obtain better control over the release profile of SCF.

The release mechanism for SCF is typically water infiltration throughpores and cracks in the sulphur coating. There tend to be two sources ofthe imperfections encountered in sulphur coatings. First, propertiesinherent in molten sulphur introduce defects within the sulphur coating.The fertilizer coating process basically involves spraying a granularsubstrate material with an atomized spray of coating material. As thefine coating droplets strike the substrate particles, they spread-outand freeze over the granule surface. A description of a typical coatingprocess is provided in U.S. Pat. No 3,991,225 (Blouin). The relativelyhigh surface tension and viscosity of molten sulphur may result in lessthan ideal granule wetting and coverage, thereby inducing a portion ofthe coating imperfections.

Second, the formation of additional coating imperfections isattributable to the allotropic nature of sulphur crystals. At variouspoints during the freezing of molten sulphur and the aging of solidsulphur, a variety of atomic structures may be present. These sulphurstructures include polymeric, amorphous, monoclinic crystalline andorthorhombic crystalline sulphur. As differential, physical variationsin the structure of sulphur occur, imperfections (voids and fissures) ofvarious sizes are formed between the sulphur crystals. Additional cracksand voids are formed as the sulphur crystals are subjected to thermalchanges, resulting in differential expansion and contraction between thecrystals. Although the amount and formation rate of the defects withinsulphur can be influenced by the thermal history of the material, theformation of crystalline sulphur and therefore imperfections, tends tobe inevitable.

Increasing the sulphur coating thickness does not provide effectivecontrol of nutrient release as imperfections form regardless of coatingthickness. In the case of commercially produced SCF, an increase incoating weight does have the effect of decreasing the overall nutrientrelease. However, the reduced release is simply a result of morefertilizer granules receiving a heavier, layered coating which does notallow any nutrient release within the growing season (termed “lock-off”)Products containing a significant number of “locked-off” granules areinefficient as more fertilizer must be applied to achieve the totaldesired nutrient quantity.

Therefore, in the case of conventional SCF, control over the coatingprocess may minimize the number of major coating defects, but there isno effective method of accurately controlling the formation of crystalimperfections. Due to a lack of imperfection control, the permeabilityof the sulphur coat cannot be significantly varied. Consequently,sufficient attenuation of the nutrient release profile is not possiblewith conventional sulphur coating technologies.

In an attempt to reduce the initial rate of nutrient release, a sealantmay be added to the surface of the sulphur coating. The sealant fillsthe coating imperfections that would otherwise transmit water into thefertilizer granule core relatively quickly. The sealants selected aretypically hydrophobic waxes, oils, polyethylene resins or combinationsthereof. These temporary sealants are subject to being degraded by soilmicrobes prior to water penetration through the sulphur coat and intothe fertilizer core. Thus, a microbiocide is often applied to thesealant in order to prevent premature degradation of the sealant. Assuch, sealants act to only delay water contact with the sulphur coating.In addition, sealants often only partially survive typical fertilizerhandling operations, resulting in a discontinuous encapsulation of thesulphur coating.

In addition, in order to obtain a relatively free-flowing product thatmay be easily handled, conditioners mass also be added to SCFConditioners are typically minerals such as finely divided clay ordiatomaceous earth, which counteract the “stickiness” of the sealant

SCF may also be undesirable due to the fact sulphur is a brittlematerial. Even well formed coatings are prone to cracking and chippingduring fertilizer handling operations. In the event the sulphur coatingremains intact after handling, the micro-pores and fissures within thecoating are generally enlarged, resulting in further degradation of anyrelease control properties.

The insufficient ability to control the release of the substratematerial from SCF has resulted in release profiles which are not idealor even desirable for many applications. This deficiency is exacerbatedby the poor coating durability exhibited by conventional SCF. Thus, insummary, SCF lacks desirable performance attributes. First, significantcontrol over a generally undesirable nutrient or substrate releaseprofile is typically not attainable using conventional sulphur coatings.Second, tropical fertilizer handling operations damage relativelyfragile sulphur coatings of SCF, resulting in a release profile thattends to be undesirable, unreliable and invariable.

In the case of SCF, recent technological developments have focussed uponimproving the sulphur coating durability and/or the coating process. Forexample, U.S. Pat. No. 4,636,242 (Timmins) describes the modification ofelemental sulphur using a dialkyl polysulphide plasticizer. Timminsindicates that the admixture is capable of reducing the viscosity ofmolten sulphur (resulting in better granule coverage) and plasticizingthe solidified coating (resulting in a more flexible coating). Thesedevelopments may somewhat reduce the rapid, initial nutrient releaseassociated with conventional SCF and improve the handlingcharacteristics of the coated fertilizer as compared with SCF. However,no significant release control technique appears evident.

Synthetic polymer coated fertilizer (“PCF”) is typically comprised ofsolid fertilizer particles as the substrate material surrounded by apolymer coating (i.e.: polyethylene, polyurethane, polyolefin, alkydresin, etc.). The are several advantages of PCF as compared to SCF.First, PCF typically possesses a less rapid, initial rate of release andsustained nutrient supply longer into the growing season. Second,polymer coatings are typically more durable than sulphur coatings andtherefore, less susceptible to damage during handling. Third, due to thelighter coating material, PCF usually possesses a higher nutrientcontent, by total weight of fertilizer. In the case of commerciallyavailable SCF, the sulphur coating may comprise up to 30% of the totalfertilizer weight. By comparison, PCF seldom contains more than 15%coating material, by weight of fertilizer.

However, there are some disadvantages associated with PCF. There may beenvironmental concerns. Polymer coatings may breakdown very slowly (ornot at all), resulting in a plastic residue in the soil system. Further,due to increased process and material costs, PCF is generallysignificantly more expensive than other controlled release fertilizers,including SCF.

Water infiltration through the porous or permeable polymer coat providesthe release mechanism for PCF. Depending upon the technology, theporosity or permeability of the polymer coating may be fixed orvariable. In the case of fixed porosity or permeability coatings, nosignificant control over the nutrient release profile is attainable. Adegree of nutrient release attenuation can be achieved with variablepermeability polymer coatings. However, due to complex manufacturingprocesses and expensive materials, the high cost of these products oftenprohibits their usage in agriculture. The largest market for PCF tendsto be horticulture and “high-end” lawn fertilizers.

Commercially available synthetic polymer and sulphur coated fertilizers(“PSCF”) typically include approximately 15% sulphur coating and lessthan 2% polymer coating. Sulphur is the primary fertilizer coating usedin conjunction with the secondary polymer coating which is designed toact as an improved sealant. Polymer sealants are typically more durablethan traditional sealants and they do not require the addition of aconditioner to the coated particles.

PSCF is an attempt to combine the lower initial rate of release anddurability of polymer coatings with the low-cost of a sulphur coating.The release profile of most PSCF is still predominantly governed by theprimary sulphur coating. The polymer topcoat is generally provided tolimit degradation of the sulphur coating during handling. More expensivePSCF may incorporate a polymer coating capable of providing a degree ofrelease control (i.e.: a variable permeability membrane).

Further, in the field of construction materials (such as sulphurconcrete and the like), the addition of filler materials, includingmineral fillers and fibers, to elemental sulphur has been used to creatematerials with highly desirable “permanent” durability. For example,U.S. Pat. No. 4,484,950 (Hinkebein) discloses an invention in whichmixtures of molten sulphur and crystalline phosphate fibers are castinto various structures. The focus of Hinkebein is to provide a strong,durable material suitable for such long-term applications as tanks,pipes and pavement.

U.S. Pat. No. 4,026,719 (Simic) describes a material comprised ofsulphur, sulphur plasticizer (such as dicyclopentadiene) and areinforcing filler such as mica, talc (platy silicates) or glass fibers.The composition is described as useful for durable coatings for floorsand slabs. Simic also refers to the potential use of the composition for“water impoundment” applications (such as lining irrigation ditches),thereby implying an impermeable (or very low permeability) material isproduced.

In the above mentioned references and others similar in nature, fibrousmaterials may be used to mechanically reinforce the properties ofsulphur compositions in an extreme fashion (i.e.: ultimate strengtheningand durability, minimizing or eliminating permeability, etc.).Therefore, it is feasible that filler reinforcement could improve thedurability of controlled release products or compositions. However,direct application of the reinforcing techniques described would likelyresult in an impermeable (or unacceptably low permeability) compositionor controlled release product, thereby “locking off” the substratematerial.

“Stabilization” is used herein to refer to methods designed to reducethe formation of defects (voids and fissures) at the material crystallevel, as described above. Such defects may be formed as a result ofdifferential crystal movement caused by allotropic crystal conversionand/or thermally induced expansion and contraction of the crystals.Stabilization techniques for materials such as sulphur may be classifiedas chemical stabilization or physical stabilization.

Chemically stabilized sulphur has been used in various constructionmaterials, such as sulphur concrete. According to A. H. Vroom, “SulphurPolymer Concrete and its Applications,” VII International Congress onPolymers in Concrete, Sep. 22–25, 1992, Moscow, pp. 606–619, a polymericsulphur concentrate (SRX) is added to molten elemental sulphur. Uponfreezing, the SRX polymer is indicated to promote formation of microsulphur crystals, as opposed to macro sulphur crystals. Apparently, asthe modified sulphur experiences crystal conversion and/or thermalchanges, less differential movements are experienced by the finecrystals, thereby reducing defect formation.

Dicyclopentadiene, styrene and limonene are examples of polymericpolysulphide plasticizers that, when added to molten sulphur, tend tosubstantially reduce the amount of crystalline sulphur formed uponfreezing (i.e.: more amorphous and polymerized sulphur is present in thecooled material) (B. R. Currell et. al., “New Uses of Sulphur,” Advancesin Chemistry Series 140, 1975, pp. 1–17). However, these chemicaladmixtures generally do not provide permanent stabilizing as sulphurcrystals are eventually formed over time.

Polymeric polysulphides have also been used in various sulphur basedconstruction materials such as road markings and masonry coatings.However, in the case of sulphur coated fertilizers, such plasticizingtechniques are generally not compatible with the fertilizer coatingprocess. During fertilizer coating, molten mixtures are sprayed onto thefertilizer granule substrate material. Once added to molten sulphur,polymeric polysulphides tend to increase the viscosity andcrystallization time of the molten mixture, as described in U.S. Pat.No. 4,129,453 (Simic). Therefore, during spraying, the modifiedpolymeric sulphur tends to exhibit very poor granule wetting and mayeven agglomerate fertilizer granules, as the modified sulphur requiresmore time to freeze (R. Jerome Timmins, “Modified Sulphur Coated Urea,”198^(th) ACS National Meeting, Miami Beach, Fla., Sep. 10–15, 1989,Paper 23, p. 3).

Alternately, fine particulate filler materials have been used tophysically stabilize sulphur compositions, primarily in constructionmaterial applications. Once dispersed throughout molten sulphur, theparticulate inclusions serve as centers for crystallization duringfreezing, thereby promoting the growth of “uniform, dense, fine-crystalstructures” as described in Yu. I. Orlowsky and B. P. Ivashkevich,“Peculiarities of Technology of Production of Sulphur Polymer Concrete .. . ,” VII International Congress on Polymers in Concrete, Sep. 22–25,1992, Moscow, p. 664. The stabilized crystal structure apparentlyexperiences less and smaller defects during differential crystalmovement induced by sulphur crystal conversion and thermal expansion andcontraction. Therefore, dispersed particulate filler materials insulphur may reduce the uncontrollable release mechanism currentlyutilized in coating applications such as SCF (i.e.: voids and fissures).

Release mechanisms for known, or conventional controlled releaseproducts and compositions may, be generally classified into twocategories. The first category is solvent infiltration through aconductive coating for the substrate material. The second category issolvent infiltration through a conductive matrix including the substratematerial.

Regarding the first category of release mechanisms, a soluble substratematerial may be encapsulated with a coating possessing pores introducedat the time of manufacturing (for example, SCF or PCF as described in“Controlled-Release and Stabilized Fertilizers in Agriculture,” Dr.Martin Trenkel, International Fertilizer Industry Association, December1997, pp. 23–26). Upon contact with the coating, the appropriate solventcan enter the core of the substrate material via the pores and dissolvethe substrate material, thereby releasing it to the surroundingenvironment.

By employing this first release mechanism, control over the release ratemay only be achieved by varying the porosity or permeability of thecoating. However, many existing coating technologies lack the ability toaccurately or significantly vary the coating porosity or permeability.Although polymer coatings with a degree of permeability control exist,the high cost of such coatings often prohibit their widespreadapplication. For example, fertilizers coated with variable permeabilitypolymers are seldom used in mass agriculture applications due to thehigh cost. The high cost of variable permeability PCF is typically aresult of relatively expensive coating materials and relatively complexcoating processes.

Regarding the second category of release mechanism, fibrous media may beimpregnated with soluble substrate materials. For instance, theabsorbent fibers may be agglomerated with the substrate, forming afibrous “matrix.” Appropriate solvents may then migrate throughout thefibers, releasing the soluble substrate material.

U.S. Pat. No. 5,019,564 (Lowe et al) discloses an invention wherebyplant fibers are used to absorb organic pesticides prior to beingloosely agglomerated into relatively non-friable “granules” Uponexposure to water, the pesticides absorbed within the fibers arereleased from the “granules” more slowly than pesticides introduceddirectly to the agricultural environment.

U.S. Pat. No. 5,762,678 (Hiles) describes the development of a soilenhancing complex in which the soft cores of cellulose fibers aredigested, resulting in hollow, “micro-capillaries” composed of thecellulose wall material. The processed “micro-capillaries” may thenabsorb water and plant nutrients within the cellulose tubes and walls.The laden “micro-fibers” are subsequently agglomerated into pellets andcoated with a moisture retaining hydrogel. A gelatinous polymer coatingis then applied for the purpose of retaining the integrity of thepellet. The contained nutrients may then be gradually released into thesoil environment.

U.S. Pat. No. 5,364,627 (Song) discloses a technology wherein thereleasable agent is dispersed throughout the cross sections of polymerfibers. This dispersion is accomplished by mixing the agent with themolten polymer, prior to spinning the mixture into fibers. The releaseof the agent is accomplished via solvent migration through contiguouslyarranged agent particles contained within the fiber matrix. Should thereleasable agent not be arranged contiguously within the fiber,mechanical action (i.e.: chewing) may be required to expose thereleasable agent to solvent contact.

In order to achieve release, the “sponge” or “wick drain” matrixapproaches described in the above patents, and several others, rely onsolvent transmission through channels or openings contained within thefibrous media. While such techniques are conducive to gradual release,and perhaps controlled release, they are generally not suitable forapplications such as high nutrient content fertilizers. One of thefactors determining the value of fertilizer products is the nutrientcontent, by weight of fertilizer. When used in slow release fertilizerapplications, the matrix approaches previously described appear toresult in a low value fertilizer product due to dependence on a largequantity of non-nutrient, carrier fibers and binders.

Finally, the dispersion of fillers within the permeable composition orcontrolled release product is also relevant. In this regard, U.S. Pat.No. 4,129,453 (Simic) describes a construction material comprised ofplasticized sulphur, reinforcing asbestos fibers and dispersing agents,such as talc or mica which aid in achieving dispersal of the asbestos.The dispersing agent is necessary to avoid “lumpiness” of the moltenmaterial mixture. Such dispersing agents are not applied directly on thefiller. Rather they added to the plasticized sulphur prior to fillermixing.

SUMMARY OF INVENTION

The present invention is directed generally at permeable compositionsand at methods for producing such permeable compositions. The presentinvention is also directed at controlled release products which includethe permeable compositions of the present invention and at methods forproducing such controlled release products.

The permeable compositions of the present invention include a matrixmaterial and a particulate filler material which is dispersed throughoutthe matrix material. The permeability of the permeable compositions isderived at least in part from interfacial passageways between the matrixmaterial and the external surfaces of the particles of filler material.These interfacial passageways are located at the interfaces between thematrix material and the external surfaces of the particles of fillermaterial. Additional permeability of the permeable compositions may bederived from the matrix material if the matrix material is itselfpermeable or degradable or if the matrix material containsimperfections.

The controlled release products of the present invention include asubstrate material which is coated with at least one layer of thepermeable composition of the present invention.

The invention is based upon the discovery that the permeability of thepermeable compositions can be controlled by controlling the interfacesand the interfacial passageways.

The ability to control the permeability of the permeable compositionsmakes the compositions of the present invention attractive for use innumerous applications, either to control permeability per se or tocontrol the release of substrate materials which are either coated withthe permeable composition or are included as a component of thepermeable composition.

For example, in agricultural applications the permeable compositions ofthe present invention may be useful for coating or incorporatingsubstrate materials such as seeds, fertilizers, pesticides andherbicides. Similarly, in pharmaceutical applications the permeablecompositions of the present invention may be useful for coating orincorporating substrate materials such as vitamins and medicines.

Preferably the permeability of the compositions is controlled in thepresent invention by applying a degradable surface treatment material tothe external surfaces of the particles of filler material before thefiller material is dispersed throughout the matrix material. When thesurface treated particles of filler material are dispersed throughoutthe matrix material the interfacial passageways are defined by thesurface treatment material which is present on the external surfaces ofthe particles of filler material and the surface treatment materialprovides degradable interfaces between the matrix material and theexternal surfaces of the particles of filler material.

By selecting the relative proportions and the physical and chemicalcharacteristics of the matrix material, the filler material and thesurface treatment material, the permeability of the permeablecompositions can be controlled. By controlling the thickness and theintegrity of the coating layer of a permeable composition that isapplied to a substrate material, the permeability of a controlledrelease product can be further controlled.

The term “substrate material” as used herein refers to any material,whether organic, inorganic, natural or synthetic which is intended to bedelivered or released or exposed to an environment. The substratematerial may, for example but without limiting the generality of theforegoing, be comprised of seeds, fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides,fungicides, medicines, vitamins, or foods.

The term “matrix material” as used herein refers to any material,whether organic, inorganic, natural or synthetic which is capable ofproviding a matrix for the filler material in the permeable compositionThe matrix material may or may not include one or more substratematerials. Depending upon the intended application of the invention, thematrix material may be permeable or impermeable, and may be physicallyand chemically stable or may be degradable.

The term “particulate filler material” as used herein refers to anyparticulate material, whether organic, inorganic, natural or synthetic.Filler material may be of any particle shape or particle size. There isno lower or upper limit to the particle size of the filler material aslong as the particle size of the filler material is compatible with theintended application of the invention. The particles of filler materialmay also have any shape (i.e., aspect ratio and surface area per unitvolume) as long as the particle shape of the filler material iscompatible with the intended application of the invention. Although afibrous (i.e, high aspect ratio) filler material may be preferred forsome applications of the invention, low aspect ratio filler materialsmay also be used in the invention and may be preferred for someapplications

The term “degradable surface treatment material” as used herein refersto any material, whether organic, inorganic, natural or synthetic, whichmay be effectively applied to the external surfaces of particles offiller material, which will provide degradable interfaces between thematrix material and the external surfaces of the particles of fillermaterial, and which will subsequently degrade either entirely or in partthrough processes such as dissolution, thermal decomposition, biologicaldegradation or chemical decomposition. The surface treatment materialmay be in solid or liquid form.

The term “interfacial passageways” as used herein refers to gaps, spacesor pores which are formed at the interfaces between the matrix materialand the external surfaces of the particles of filler material. Theseinterfacial passageways provide pathways for the migration of substancesthroughout the permeable composition. An interfacial passageway may bedefined by a single particle of filler material or may be defined by aplurality of particles of filler material which are contiguous or areinterconnected by gaps, spaces or pores. Two or more interfacialpassageways may also be interconnected to form a network of interfacialpassageways in the matrix.

The term “degradable interfaces” as used herein refers to interfacesthat are formed when surface treated particles of filler material aredispersed throughout the matrix material, (i.e., interfaces between thematrix material and the surface treatment material and interfacesbetween the surface treatment material and the external surfaces of theparticles of filler material). In the permeable compositions of thepresent invention, the interfacial passageways are initially eitherfully or partially filled with degradable surface treatment material inorder to provide the degradable interfaces. These degradable interfacesare fully or partially degradable upon degradation of the surfacetreatment material to facilitate some migration of substances throughthe interfacial passageways. Prior to degradation, the degradableinterfaces may facilitate the transfer of forces between the matrixmaterial and the filler material, thus enabling the filler material toperform a mechanical reinforcement function in the permeablecomposition.

The term “permeable composition” as used herein refers to a compositionwhich is comprised of a matrix material, a particulate filler material,and at least some interfacial passageways between the matrix materialand the external surfaces of the particles of filler material. Thematrix material may or may not include a substrate material.

The term “controlled release product” as used herein refers to a productwhich is comprised of a substrate material and a coating on thesubstrate material which includes at least one layer of a permeablecomposition. The term “release” as used herein refers to the exposure ofthe substrate material to a surrounding environment. The term “control”refers to the ability to affect the release of the substrate materialfrom the controlled release product.

The term “stable” as used herein refers to a material which does nottend to be prone to physical or chemical degradation through processessuch as dissolution, thermal decomposition, biological degradation orchemical decomposition.

In a first preferred aspect, the invention is a permeable compositioncomprising:

-   (a) an amount of a matrix material;-   (b) an amount of a particulate filler material dispersed throughout    the matrix material, wherein each of the particles of filler    material is comprised of an external surface; and-   (c) interfacial passageways between the matrix material and the    external surfaces of the particles of filler material.

In a second preferred aspect, the invention is a controlled releaseproduct comprising:

-   (a) a substrate material;-   (b) a permeable composition coating the substrate material in a    coating layer, the permeable composition comprising:    -   (i) an amount of a matrix material,    -   (ii) an amount of a particulate filler material dispersed        throughout the matrix material, wherein each of the particles of        filler material is comprised of an external surface; and    -   (iii) interfacial passageways between the matrix material and        the external surfaces of the particles of filler material.

In a third preferred aspect, the invention is a method for producing apermeable composition, the method comprising the steps of:

-   (a) providing an amount of a particulate filler material, wherein    each of the particles of filler material is comprised of an external    surface;-   (b) applying an amount of a degradable surface treatment material to    the external surfaces of the particles of filler material to form    surface treated particles of filler material; and-   (c) dispersing the surface treated particles of filler material    throughout an amount of a matrix material to form the permeable    composition such that interfacial passageways between the matrix    material and the external surfaces of the particles of filler    material are defined by the surface treatment material and such that    degradable interfaces between the matrix material and the external    surfaces of the particles of filler material are provided by the    surface treatment material.

In a fourth preferred aspect, the invention is a method for producing acontrolled release product, the method comprising the steps of:

-   (a) providing an amount of a particulate filler material, wherein    each of the particles of filler material is comprised of an external    surface;-   (b) applying an amount of a degradable surface treatment material to    the external surfaces of the particles of filler material to form    surface treated particles of filler material; and-   (c) dispersing the surface treated particles of filler material    throughout an amount of a matrix material to form a permeable    composition such that interfacial passageways between the matrix    material and the external surfaces of the particles of filler    material are defined by the surface treatment material and such that    degradable interfaces between the matrix material and the external    surfaces of the particles of filler material are provided by the    surface treatment material;-   (d) providing a substrate material; and-   (e) applying the permeable composition to the substrate material in    a coating layer to form the controlled release product.

The substrate material may be incorporated into the permeablecomposition as a component of the matrix material or the substratematerial may be coated with the permeable composition. A permeablecomposition comprising a substrate material may also be coated with apermeable composition which does not comprise a substrate material.

The substrate material may be selected from a wide range of materialsdepending upon the application of the invention. In the preferredembodiment however, the substrate material is comprised of a fertilizer.The fertilizer may be incorporated into the permeable composition toform a “matrix type fertilizer” or particles of the fertilizer may becoated with the permeable composition to form a “coated typefertilizer”. A matrix type fertilizer may also be coated with apermeable composition to form a combination fertilizer if desired.Preferably the fertilizer is a urea fertilizer.

The primary functions of the matrix material are to provide a matrix forthe filler material and to provide support for the interfacialpassageways. The matrix material may also increase the durability of apermeable composition or controlled release product or serve as acarrier for a substrate material which has been incorporated into apermeable composition or controlled release product.

The matrix material may be comprised of any organic or inorganicmaterial which is suitable for the intended application of the permeablecomposition or controlled release product. Depending upon the intendedapplication, the matrix material may be permeable or impermeable and mayeither be chemically and physically stable or be degradable.

In the preferred embodiment the substrate material is comprised of afertilizer. In one preferred embodiment of permeable composition, thematrix material is preferably comprised of sulphur. In a secondpreferred embodiment of permeable composition, the matrix material ispreferably comprised of fertilizer as a substrate material and sulphuras a carrier material. The sulphur is most preferably elemental sulphur.

In the preferred embodiment, sulphur is preferred because it isinexpensive relative to other possible matrix materials. Elementalsulphur is particularly preferred because it is inexpensive relative tochemically stabilized sulphur materials. Although elemental sulphurtends to be chemically unstable and prone to deterioration due toabrasion and other physical stresses, these tendencies are minimized bythe presence of the filler material in the matrix, which serves in thepreferred embodiment to mechanically reinforce and physically stabilizethe elemental sulphur matrix material.

The primary function of the filler material is to act with the surfacetreatment material and the matrix material to form the interfacialpassageways. The filler material may also provide mechanicalreinforcement for the matrix material or physical stabilization of thematrix material.

The filler material may be comprised of any particulate organic orinorganic material which is compatible with the matrix material andwhich may be surface treated with the surface treatment material.Preferably the filler material is relatively stable and relativelyimpermeable.

In the preferred embodiment where the substrate material is comprised ofa fertilizer, the filler material is preferably comprised ofwollastonite. Most preferably, the filler material in the preferredembodiment is comprised of wollastonite fibers.

The primary function of the surface treatment material is to define theinterfacial passageways when the filler material is dispersed throughoutthe matrix material by forming degradable interfaces between the matrixmaterial and the external surfaces of the particles of filler material.

A possible secondary function of the surface treatment material may beto facilitate at least a temporary bond between the matrix material andthe filler material which may enable the filler material to perform amechanical reinforcement function in the permeable composition. Thisbond will tend to deteriorate upon degradation of the degradableinterfaces.

The surface treatment material may also aid in dispersing the fillermaterial throughout the matrix material. Alternatively, if desired ornecessary, a second surface treatment agent may be utilized for thepurpose of aiding in the dispersal of the filler material.

The surface treatment material may be comprised of any substance whichis compatible with the intended application of the invention and whichis capable of providing the degradable interfaces due to dissolution,thermal decomposition, biological degradation, chemical decomposition orsome other process. Preferably the surface treatment material will alsoprovide a bond between the matrix material and the filler material whichwill deteriorate upon degradation of the degradable interfaces.

In the preferred embodiment where the substrate material is comprised ofa fertilizer, where the matrix material is comprised of sulphur, andwhere the filler material is comprised of wollastonite, the surfacetreatment material is preferably comprised of a naphthalene sulphonateformaldehyde copolymer.

The durability, permeability and other properties of the permeablecomposition will depend upon the following controllable design factors:

-   1. the choice of matrix material, filler material, and surface    treatment material;-   2. the chemical and physical characteristics of the matrix material;-   3. the chemical and physical characteristics of the filler material    (including particle shape and particle size);-   4. the chemical and physical characteristics of the surface    treatment material; and-   5. the relative proportions of matrix material, filler material and    surface treatment material in the permeable composition.

The durability, permeability and other properties of the controlledrelease product will depend upon further controllable design factorsrelating to the thickness and the integrity of the coating of permeablecomposition which is applied to the substrate material.

These design factors make it possible to tailor a permeable compositionand controlled release product to provide a specific desiredperformance. This desired performance may relate to the permeability ofa permeable composition or to the release profile for a substratematerial which is included in a permeable composition or in a controlledrelease product.

The matrix material is selected to be compatible with the fillermaterial, the surface treatment material and with the intendedapplication of the invention. A relatively durable and stable matrixmaterial may provide a more extended release profile for a substratematerial. A degradable matrix material may provide a shortened releaseprofile for a substrate material. Elemental sulphur, the preferredmatrix material in the preferred embodiment for fertilizer applications,tends to disintegrate under physical stress or in the presence of wateror humidity, thus releasing the fertilizer into the surroundingenvironment more quickly than if the matrix material were morephysically stable. The matrix material is preferably compatible with theenvironment in which the permeable composition is to be used and ispreferably cost effective.

The filler material is selected to be compatible with the matrixmaterial, the surface treatment material and with the intendedapplication of the invention. A relatively stable filler material willlikely be able to perform a physical reinforcement function for thematrix over the entire expected service life of the permeablecomposition. A degradable filler material may not provide good physicalreinforcement performance, but may provide a shortened release profilefor a substrate material as the filler material degrades. The fillermaterial is preferably compatible with the environment in which thepermeable composition is to be used and is preferably cost effective.

The surface treatment material is selected to be compatible with thematrix material, the filler material and with the intended applicationof the invention. The surface treatment material is preferablycompatible with the environment in which the permeable composition is tobe used and is preferably cost effective. Preferably the surfacetreatment material enhances or at least does not interfere with thedispersal of the filler material throughout the matrix material.

The particle size and shape of the filler material is selected to becompatible with the intended application of the invention and with thefunctions to be performed by the filler material. High aspect ratiofiller materials will tend to provide more physical reinforcement forthe matrix material than low aspect ratio filler materials. On the otherhand, high aspect ratio filler materials will have a higher surface areaper unit volume than low aspect ratio filler materials and may thereforebe more difficult to disperse in the matrix material.

The following general trends can be suggested for design factorspertaining to permeable compositions and controlled release products:

-   1. the amount of mechanical reinforcement (or physical    stabilization) provided to a matrix by a filler material will    increase as the amount of filler material increases;-   2. the amount of mechanical reinforcement provided to a matrix by a    filler material will generally increase as the aspect ratio of the    filler material increases;-   3. the amount of mechanical reinforcement provided to a matrix by a    filler material will generally increase as the stability of the    filler material increases;-   4. the dispersability of a filler material throughout a matrix    material may tend to decrease as the aspect ratio of the filler    material increases (due to an increase in surface area per unit    volume of filler material);-   5. the permeability of a permeable composition may tend to decrease    and the release profile for a controlled release product may tend to    extend as the amount of mechanical reinforcement or physical    stabilization of a matrix material increases (due to a potential    increase in durability, stability or integrity of the permeable    composition);-   6. the permeability of a permeable composition may tend to increase    and the release profile for a controlled release product may tend to    shorten as the number of interfacial passageways in the permeable    composition increases (due to an increase in the number of potential    flow pathways in the permeable composition);-   7. the permeability of a permeable composition may tend to increase    and the release profile for a controlled release product may tend to    shorten as the amount of surface treatment material applied to a    filler material increases (due to a potential increase in the size    of the interfacial passageways);-   8. the permeability of a permeable composition may tend to decrease    and the release profile for a controlled release product may tend to    extend as the stability of a matrix material increases (due to a    potential increase in the durability, stability or integrity of the    permeable composition);-   9. the permeability of a permeable composition may tend to decrease    and the release profile for a controlled release product may tend to    extend as the stability of a surface treatment material increases    (due to a potential increase in the amount of time required to    degrade the degradable interfaces);-   10. the release profile for a controlled release product may tend to    extend as the thickness of a coating layer increases (due to    increased length of the interfacial passageways); and-   11. the release profile for a controlled release product may tend to    extend as the integrity of a coating layer increases (due to reduced    permeability of the permeable composition).

This list of trends is not exhaustive. It must also be cautioned thatsome of the trends may be subject to interdependence of design factors.For example, although increasing the amount of filler material in amatrix may reduce permeability by increasing the durability, stabilityand integrity of a permeable composition, an increase in amount offiller material also offers the potential for increased permeability dueto an increased number of interfacial passageways. The net effect of anincrease in the amount of filler material may therefore be dependentupon properties such as the initial stability and durability of thematrix material.

With this caution in mind, the design factors can be manipulated in theapplication of the invention to provide an overall net effect which willassist in the design of a permeable composition or controlled releaseproduct having desired properties.

In addition, each of the design factors may be varied within aparticular permeable composition or controlled release product to refinefurther the properties of the composition or product. As one example, asingle permeable composition may include more than one type of fillermaterial or particles of filler material having varying shapes andsizes. As a second example, a single permeable composition may containparticles of filler material having varying types or amounts of surfacetreatment material applied to them.

SUMMARY OF DRAWINGS

Embodiments, of the invention will now be described with reference tothe accompanying drawings, in which:

FIG. 1 provides a graph of durability test results for Example 1performed for various surface coatings;

FIG. 2 provides a graph of the release control test results for Example1 for the Wollastonite sugar treatment series performed for surfacetreated wollastonite;

FIG. 3 provides a graph of the release control test results for Example1 for the Wollastonite sulphonate treatment series performed for surfacetreated wollastonite;

FIG. 4 provides a graph of the release control test results for Example1 for the muscovite mica aluminum sulphate treatment series performedfor surface treated mica;

FIG. 5 provides a graph of the results of a controlled releaseassessment study for Example 2;

FIG. 6 provides a graph of the results of a mechanical durabilityassessment study for Example 2; and

FIG. 7 provides a graph of the results of a variation of controlledrelease properties for Example 3.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

The present invention relates to a variety of applications and fieldsrequiring or desiring a mechanism for achieving a relatively reliableand relatively controlled release of a substrate material eithercontained within a permeable composition or having a coating appliedthereto. Via attenuation of the release mechanism, the present inventionmay provide variable rates of release. Specifically, the release controltechnique of the present invention is believed to be amenable toproducing permeable compositions and controlled release productspossessing a variety of release profiles designed to meet specificproduct requirements. For example, with respect to agriculturalapplications, the controlled release fertilizer products and permeablefertilizer compositions of the present invention may allow the tailoringof nutrient (substrate material) release profiles to disparate cropnutritional requirements, soil conditions and/or growing season length.

Further, the present invention may provide improved durability to thepermeable compositions and controlled release products to reducepotential physical degradation under applied stresses (such as, abrasivehandling operations, thermal stresses, etc.). Thus, such damage, whichwould normally unduly influence the release profile, may be mitigated.In addition, as a result of improved durability, the amount of thepermeable composition or the release control product required towithstand applied stresses may be reduced. Thus, the resultingcomposition or product may possess higher concentrations of valuablesubstrate material and lower concentrations of lesser valued materials.

As a result of the above, the present invention may provide a relativelycost effective manner of introducing release profile variability tothose applications currently lacking such an attribute (such as sulphurcoated fertilizers). The present invention may also provide a lessexpensive release control alternative to those products currentlyemploying costly release control techniques (such as variablepermeability polymer membrane coatings).

As described further below, the preferred embodiment of the withininvention is particularly applicable to agricultural applications, suchas fertilizers and pesticides. However, the permeable compositions,release control products and methods described herein are furtherapplicable to other applications and fields such as pharmaceuticals,medicines and nutraceuticals.

With respect to agricultural applications, and in particularfertilizers, the present invention may provide growers with severaladvantages. Utilizing variable release profiles, growers can conceivablyselect compositions and products designed to meet their specific cropand soil demands. Improved substrate material (fertilizer or nutrient)delivery may be attainable with reduced numbers of applications.Further, the initial rate of substrate material release may be reduced,thereby minimizing soil toxicity and crop “burning” associated withuncontrolled release fertilizers and some controlled release fertilizers(such as conventional SCF). By reducing the initial rate of substratematerial release, fewer losses may be incurred. A reduction in therequired number of applications throughout the growing season mayrepresent a substantial savings on labour and equipment operating andmaintenance costs. As well, fewer losses may result in decreasedpotential for water contamination or harmful volatilization emissions.

The present invention is directed at a relatively durable, costeffective method of obtaining controlled release for those applicationsrequiring such an attribute. In particular, the within invention isdirected at a permeable composition comprising an amount of a matrixmaterial, an amount of a particulate filler material dispersedthroughout the matrix material, wherein each of the particles of fillermaterial is comprised of an external surface, and interfacialpassageways between the matrix material and the external surfaces of thefiller material.

In a first aspect of the invention, the matrix material of the permeablecomposition is comprised of a substrate material such that the fillermaterial is dispersed throughout the substrate material. In a secondaspect of the invention, the permeable composition is used in coating asubstrate material. In a third aspect of the invention, the invention isdirected at a controlled release product comprised of a substratematerial and a permeable composition coating the substrate material in acoating layer. Finally, the present invention is further directed at amethod for producing the permeable composition and a method forproducing the controlled release product.

In all aspects of the invention, a degradable surface treatment materialis preferably applied to the external surfaces of the particles offiller material such that the interfacial passageways are defined by thesurface treatment material and such that the surface treatment materialprovides degradable interfaces between the matrix material and theexternal surfaces of the particles of filler material.

Generally, the release control mechanism of the present invention isrelated to the selection and interplay of a number of factors: thefiller material properties (including particle size, aspect ratio andsurface area); filler material quantity or amount; surface treatmentmaterial properties; surface treatment material quantity or amount; andthe thickness of the permeable composition. Further, the properties ofthe filler material and the quantity of filler material also affect thepotential mechanical reinforcing and physical stabilizing abilities ofthe within invention. Finally, a number of other factors are alsoconsidered in the selection of the filler material and surface treatmentmaterial of the invention: the dispersion capabilities of the fillermaterial; the compatibility of the filler material and surface treatmentmaterial with the method of production of the permeable composition andcontrolled release product; the environmental acceptance of the fillermaterial and surface treatment material; and the costs of the fillermaterial and surface treatment material. All of these factors andconsiderations are discussed in detail below.

The substrate material of the present invention may be any substrate,agent or matter desired or required to be released to the surroundingenvironment in a relatively controlled manner. For instance, thesubstrate material may be, but is not limited to, one or more of thefollowing: seeds; fertilizers (such as urea, ammonium phosphate, etc.);herbicides; fungicides; pesticides; pharmaceuticals; vitamins;veterinary medicines; and foods. In the preferred embodiment of theinvention, the substrate material is comprised of a fertilizer. Anyfertilizer suitable for the particular application may be used. However,in the preferred embodiment, the fertilizer is comprised of Urea((NH₂)₂CO). Urea has the highest content of nitrogen commonlycommercially available for granular fertilizers (46%, by weight).

The filler material of the present invention may be any particulatematerial compatible with the particular application of the invention.Preferably the filler material possesses an aspect ratio in which thesize of the filler particle is greater in one dimension than in anotherdimension. In other words, the filler material preferably has an aspectratio greater than 1. Examples of fillers possessing an aspect ratiogreater than one include fillers which are comprised of platestructures, fillers which are comprised of fiber structures andcombinations thereof. Preferably, the filler material is comprised of afiber structure. However, as indicated, a combination of differentfiller materials may also be used. In the discussion that follows.“fibrous filler” shall describe an filler material possessing an aspectratio greater than one (such as fibers and plates) while “non-fibrousfiller” shall describe any filler material not possessing an aspectratio greater than one.

It is believed that the filler material provides mechanicalreinforcement to the permeable composition or controlled release productof the within invention. The mechanical filler material reinforcementmay improve the strength and durability of the composition or product.As a result, the composition or product may be better able to withstandexternally applied stresses, such as abrasive handling, thermal shock,etc.

Further, it is believed that the filler material may physicallystabilize the permeable composition or controlled release product. Inparticular, it has been found that fibrous filler materials maysubstantially reduce the incidence and/or size of material defectsresulting from inevitable material alterations, such as allotropiccrystal conversion and/or thermally induced expansion and contraction ofmaterial crystals. Particularly in the case where the matrix material iscomprised of sulphur (as discussed below), the physical stabilizingaction exerted by filler material inclusions inhibits or minimizes theuncontrollable release mechanism (i.e.: cracks and defects) currentlyemployed in applications such as sulphur coated fertilizers.

Finally, the filler material forms or facilitates the formation of therelease control mechanism of the present invention. More particularly,the interfaces between the longitudinal surface area of the fibrousfiller material and the matrix material provides passageways and/orsites for passageway formation. Once formed, these interfacialpassageways serve as conduits for solvent transmission into the core ofthe composition or product. Where the substrate material is capable ofdissolution or degradation, the interfacial passageways also serve aschannels for the transmission of the substrate material.

As indicated, any organic, inorganic, natural or synthetic fillermaterial may be used. For instance, the filler material may be comprisedof one or a combination of the following (listed in no particularorder): (1) inorganic (mineral) fillers such as wollastonite (calciummetasilicate), calcium metaphosphate fibers, asbestos, mica, talc,kaopolite, glass fibers, ceramic fibers (i.e. alumina-silica fibers),vitreous fibers (i.e.: blast furnace slag fibers), basalt fibers or acombination thereof; (2) organic fillers such as plastic fibers (i.e.:polypropylene, polyethylene, polyvinyl alcohol, etc.), cotton, hemp orcellulose. In the preferred embodiment, the filler material is comprisedof wollastonite. Wollastonite is a fibrous mineral comprised ofacicular, calcium metasilicate (CaSiO₃) crystals.

The particular filler material is selected to be suitable for orcompatible with the particular application of the invention. Factorsaffecting the selection of the filler material include, but are notlimited to, the desired stability of the filler material, itsenvironmental acceptability and cost effectiveness. Preferably, thefiller material is thermally, chemically and physically stable uponcontact with the matrix material and the method of production (i.e.:preferably, the filler does not substantially melt, volatilize,decompose, dissolve, disintegrate, etc, during its production or usefulservice life of the composition or product). The filler material is alsopreferably environmentally compatible with the intended application.Finally, the filler material cost is preferably compatible with theeconomics of the intended application.

It has been found that the following properties of the filler materialmay affect the release control mechanism, mechanical reinforcingabilities and stabilizing abilities of the present invention: (1) fillerparticle size (length×diameter/thickness); (2) filler particle aspectratio (ratio of length to diameter/thickness); and (3) filler particlesurface area. Any filler particle size, filler particle aspect ratio andfiller particle surface area capable of producing a permeablecomposition having the desired properties may be utilized.

In the preferred embodiment the filler material is comprised ofwollastonite. Table 1 provides a representative listing of commerciallyavailable wollastonite products which may be suitable for use as afiller material in the preferred embodiment of the invention. Table 1Aincludes wollastonite products which have actually been tested and havebeen found to be suitable for use as a filler material. Table 1Bincludes additional wollastonite products which are expected, because oftheir physical properties, also to be suitable for use as a fillermaterial in the preferred embodiment of the invention.

The wollastonite products listed in Table 1 are all produced and sold byNyco Minerals, Inc. or by its licensees or related companies.

Table 1 is not intended to provide an exhaustive list of suitablewollastonite products. Other wollastonite products produced and sold byNyco Minerals, Inc. or by other producers of wollastonite may also besuitable for use in the invention.

TABLE 1A Tested Wollastonite Filler Materials Example # NYCO ® ProductNames 8 NYAD ® M 100 9 NYAD ® M 200 10 NYAD ® M 325 11 NYAD ® M 400 12NYAD ® M 1250

TABLE 1B Potential Wollastonite Filler Materials Example # NYCO ®Product Names 1 NYAD G ® 2 NYGLOS ® 20 3 NYGLOS ® M 15 4 NYGLOS ® 12 5NYGLOS ® 8 6 NYGLOS ® 5 7 NYGLOS ® 4 13 NYAD G ® Special 14 ULTRAFIBE ®55 15 NYCOR ® R 16 RRIMGLOS ™ I 17 RRIMGLOS ™ II 18 NYAD ® 200 19 NYAD ®325 20 NYAD ® 400 21 NYAD ® 475 22 NYAD ® 1250 23 NYGLOS ® M3 24NYGLOS ® M20 25 NYGLOS ® M50 26 NYAD ® M475

A filler material of any particle size, aspect ratio and surface areamay be useful in the invention. More particularly however, the range ofpreferable particle sizes, aspect ratios and surface areas may beclassified according to a general preferred range, a more preferablerange and a most preferable range as set out in Table 2. Although theranges of Table 2 may be generally applicable to any filler materialdispersed throughout any matrix material, the ranges have been found tobe particularly applicable in the preferred embodiment in which thefiller material is comprised of wollastonite and the matrix material iscomprised of sulphur.

TABLE 2 Ranges of Filler Particle Size, Aspect Ratio and Surface AreaGeneral More Most Preferred Preferable Preferable Parameter Min/MaxRange Range Range Average* Minimum  <3 microns  3 microns  3 micronsParticle Maximum  >40 microns  25 microns 15 microns Diameter/ ThicknessRange (microns) Average* Minimum  <10 microns  10 microns 10 micronsParticle Length Maximum >600 microns 100 microns 50 microns Range(microns) Average* Minimum <2:1  2:1  3:1 Particle Aspect Maximum >20.113:1 10:1 Ratio Range Average* Minimum  <1.5  4.5  6.0 Particle Surfacem²/cm³ of m²/cm³ of m²/cm³ of Area Range specific specific specificfiller filler filler volume volume volume Maximum >15.0 15.0 15.0 m²/cm³of m²/cm³ of m²/cm³ of specific specific specific filler filler fillervolume volume volume *The average dimensions of particles of fillermaterial may be determined by any suitable method as may be practiced inthe art.

In an exemplary method for determining particle thickness, length andaspect ratio, average particle dimensions are determined by computerizedanalysis of images generated by an optical microscope equipped with acamera and an automated stage. A small amount of a sample to be analyzedis placed in a transparent container using an appropriate liquid fordispersal. A camera is then used to generate a digital signal which issubsequently processed by image analysis software. The software definesthe border of each image by setting a grayscale threshold value. Thegrayscale image is converted into a binary image. Corresponding screenpixels are then used to represent an “area” for each projectedtwo-dimensional image of particles within the original field of view.Analysis tools then eliminate particles that are determined to be“crossed” or “touching”. The remaining particles are then measured todetermine maximum diameter (length) and minimum diameter (width). Atleast 1,000 and preferably 5,000 or more particles are typicallyanalyzed for each sample. The results are then weighted by area and themean average length, mean average diameter and mean average aspect ratioare determined. Suitable image analysis software suited is commerciallyavailable. Suitable image analysis systems are also commerciallyavailable.

An exemplary method for determining specific surface area utilizes acommercially, available automated instrument (Micromeritics® ASAP 2000).In this method, the physical adsorption of an inert gas is conducted ata pressure which is within the range of linearity for derivation ofspecific surface area using the Brunauer, Emmet and Teller (BET)standard model for gas adsorption on particulate solids.

In general, the particle size of the filler material is preferably lessthan the thickness of the permeable composition. Larger filler sizes arepotentially suitable for relatively large thicknesses of the permeablecomposition, while smaller filler sizes are generally more suited torelatively small thicknesses of the permeable composition. It may bedesirable to reduce the weight (i.e.: thickness) of the permeablecomposition in order to maximize the value of the composition orproduct, which tends to be derived from the amount (by weight) of thesubstrate material (such as fertilizer) contained inside the compositionor product.

It has further been found that the quantity of filler material presentin the composition or product affects its release control mechanism,mechanical reinforcing abilities and stabilizing abilities. Any fillerquantity capable of producing a permeable composition having the desiredproperties may be utilized. However, the range of preferable fillerquantity may also be classified according to a general range, apreferable range and a most preferable range as set out in Table 3.Although the ranges of Table 3 may be generally applicable to any fillermaterial dispersed throughout any matrix material, the ranges have beenfound to be particularly applicable in the preferred embodiment in whichthe filler material is comprised of wollastonite and the matrix materialis comprised of sulphur.

TABLE 3 Suitable Ranges of Filler Quantity Minimum Maximum QuantityQuantity General Mass of Filler Required (by   2%   50% mass of matrixmaterial) General Volume of Filler Required (by 1.4% 34.5% volume ofmatrix material) Preferable Mass of Filler Required (by   5%   30% massof matrix material) Preferable Volume of Filler Required 3.5% 20.7% (byvolume of matrix material) Most Preferable Mass of Filler  10%   20%Required (by mass of matrix material) Most Preferable Volume of Filler6.9% 13.8% Required (by volume of matrix material)

However, the permeable composition may be comprised of more voluminousfiller material having a lower specific gravity within a greaterthickness of the composition or less voluminous filler material having agreater specific gravity within a smaller thickness of the composition.Therefore, the preferable ranges of filler quantities may be broadened.Accordingly, in the preferred embodiment, the general range of fillerquantity is approximately 0.5% to 200% filler, by volume of matrixmaterial. The preferable range of filler quantity is 1% to 120% filler,by volume of matrix material. The most preferable range of fillerquantity is approximately 2% to 80% filler, by volume of matrixmaterial.

As indicated, a degradable surface treatment material is preferablyapplied to the external surfaces of the particles of filler material. Itis believed that the surface treatment of the particles of fillermaterial facilitates the release control mechanism of the presentinvention and may facilitate compatibility of specific filler materialswith specific matrix materials (i.e.: provides or improves fillerdispersion). As well, in order for the filler material to bemechanically reinforcing, the surface treatment material also preferablyprovides for a transfer of any externally applied loads from the matrixmaterial to the particles of filler material across the degradableinterface, at least until such time that the interface in fact degrades.

Specifically, it is believed that the surface treatment material appliedto the external surfaces of the particles of filler material initiatesor enhances the formation of the interfacial passageways between thematrix material and the external surfaces of the particles of fillermaterial. Thus, surface treatment refers to the application of a surfacetreatment material to the surface area of the particulate fillermaterial. The surface treatment material is preferably soluble ordegradable in the presence of a solvent or degradation process specificto the surface treatment.

More particularly, the surface treatment material provides degradableinterfaces between the matrix material and the external surfaces of theparticles of filler material. Thus, upon contact with an appropriatesolvent or degradation agent, the surface treatment material isdissolved or degraded, thereby forming or enhancing the interfacialpassageway between the longitudinal surface of the particles of fillermaterial and the matrix material. The dissolution or degradation of thesurface treatment material provides interfacial passageways where nonewould otherwise exist and/or augments those interfacial passageways thatmay already exist.

Therefore, the surface treatment material is believed to provide theprimary element of control over the release rate of the substratematerial. Accordingly, it is further believed that control over therelease profile may be achieved by selection and variation of one ormore of the factors described below.

First, the surface treatment material or materials may be selected tocontrol the rate of formation or enhancement of the interfacialpassageways. By selecting surface treatment materials of variedsolubility or degradation properties, it is believed that adjustment ofthe surface treatment dissolution or degradation rate may be attained.Second, the thickness of the permeable composition may be selected tocontrol the rate of formation or enhancement of the interfacialpassageways. By adjusting the thickness, the length of the particles offiller material is varied proportionally. Consequently, the rate atwhich complete interfacial passageways are formed or enhanced along thesurface of the filler particles may be controlled.

Third, the amount or dosage of the surface treatment material applied tothe external surfaces of the particles of filler material may beselected to control the size of the interfacial passageways. Upondissolution or degradation of the surface treatment material, acorrelation between the amount of surface treatment material applied andthe properties (i.e., size, effectiveness etc.) of the interfacialpassageway may be observed. Fourth, the volume or amount of the surfacetreated filler material used may be selected to control the amount ofinterfacial passageways. By adjusting the amount of the surface treatedfiller material contained within the permeable composition, it isbelieved that the number of interfacial passageways induced or enhancedin the composition may be controlled. Finally, the volume of the totalfiller material may be selected to control the amount of interfacialpassageways. In applications where greater durability and slower releaseare required, the extent of the surface treatment material applied tothe particles of filler material may be adjusted. In such cases, thetotal filler material content may be increased to enhance durability andthe amount of surface treated filler material may be reduced in order toachieve the desired release profile.

As indicated, the applied surface treatment material may also serve as adispersing agent for the filler material. In certain applications,untreated filler material may not be readily dispersible in specificmatrix materials. Inability to achieve filler dispersal may be afunction of various interference mechanisms (i.e.: statically chargedfiller particles, poor matrix material wetting properties, etc.) In suchcases, the surface treatment material and the dosage or amount areselected to not only initiate or enhance interfacial passagewayformation, but to also render the filler material dispersible in thematrix material.

In certain applications where filler surface treatment is notspecifically required for dispersal, the surface treatment of the fillermaterial may result in substantially reducing the mixing effort requiredfor dispersal. From a practical or production process standpoint, it maybe desirable to select surface treatment materials and amounts ordosages which not only initiate or enhance interfacial passagewayformation, but also improve dispersal of the filler material particleswithin the matrix material.

The surface treatment material may be comprised of any solid, liquid,organic, inorganic, natural or synthetic surface treatment agent capableof providing the desired degradable interfaces between the matrixmaterial and the external surfaces of the particles of filler material.For example, the surface treatment material may be comprised of one ormore of the following (listed in no particular order): aluminumsulphate; sodium lauryl sulphate; alkyl sulphates; substituted phenolethoxy phosphate esters; hydrated lime; tridecyl alcohol ethoxylate;octylphenol ethoxylate; sorbitol monooleate ethoxylate; canola oil;sodium silicate; calcium chloride; sugar; potassium chloride; ammoniumsulphate; naphthalene; butylnaphthalene; naphthalene sulphonate; calciumlignosulphonate; naphthalene sulphonate formaldehyde condensates; sodiumalkyl benzene sulphonates; styrene butadiene; dairy products;polyoxyalkylene glycol ether; polypropylene glycol monobutyl ether;lecithin; polyvinyl alcohol; detergent and combinations thereof.

Preferably, the surface treatment material is water soluble so that thedegradable interfaces degrade in the presence of water. In the preferredembodiment, the surface treatment material is comprised of a naphthalenesulphonate formaldehyde copolymer.

As indicated, the surface treatment material provides degradableinterfaces, which interfaces may degrade through various actions such asdissolution, thermal decomposition, biological degradation, chemicaldecomposition, etc. Where the substrate material is also selected todegrade, the mode of surface treatment material degradation selected istypically the same as that required to degrade the substrate material.For example, in the case of substrate materials which are degradablethrough dissolution by a particular solvent, the surface treatmentmaterial selected is typically also soluble in the same solvent.

In addition to degradability, the surface treatment material is alsopreferably selected to provide one or more of the following furtherdesirable properties to the composition or product of the presentinvention. First, the surface treatment material is preferablythermally, chemically and physically stable upon contact with the matrixmaterial and the production method (i.e.: the surface treated fillermaterial must not substantially melt, volatilize, decompose, dissolve,disintegrate, etc., during the production method). Second, in caseswhere the filler material could not otherwise be dispersed in a matrixmaterial during production (due to electrostatic repulsion, surfacetension effects, etc), the surface treatment material preferably rendersthe filler material compatible with the matrix material to providefiller dispersal. In cases where the filler material is difficult todisperse in the matrix material, the surface treatment material may beused to improve filler dispersal. Third, the surface treatment materialis preferably environmentally compatible with the intended application.Fourth, the surface treatment material cost is preferably compatiblewith the economics of the intended application.

Finally, it is also generally desirable that the type of surfacetreatment material be compatible (i.e.: bondable) with the fillermaterial and the matrix material for the purpose of maintaining themechanical reinforcing properties of the filler material particles.Incompatible surface treatment materials may induce “slippage” along thefiller material/matrix material interface, thereby reducing the fillermaterial's mechanical reinforcing capability.

The quantity or dosage of the surface treatment material applied to theparticles of filler material has been found to affect both the releasecontrol mechanism and dispersion of filler material in the presentinvention. Any amount, quantity or dosage of surface treatment materialcapable of producing a permeable composition having the desiredproperties may be utilized. However, the range of preferable amounts ofsurface treatment material may be classified according to a generalrange, a preferable range and a most preferable range as set out inTable 4. Although the ranges of Table 4 may be generally applicable, theranges have been found to be particularly applicable in the preferredembodiment in which the filler material is comprised of wollastonite andthe matrix material is comprised of sulphur. Further, the ranges havebeen further found to be particularly applicable in the preferredembodiment in which the surface treatment material is comprised ofnaphthalene sulphonate formaldehyde copolymer.

TABLE 4 Ranges of Amounts or Dosages of Surface Treatment MaterialMinimum Maximum Quantity Quantity General Surface Treatment MaterialMass 0.1% 20% Dosage Required (by mass of Filler Material) GeneralSurface Treatment Material 0.0002 cm³/m² 0.04 cm³/m² Volume DosageRequired (surface treatment material volume/filler material surfacearea) Preferable Surface Treatment 0.5% 10% Material Mass DosageRequired (by mass of filler material) Preferable Surface TreatmentMaterial 0.001 cm³/m² 0.02 cm³/m² Volume Dosage Required (surfacetreatment material volume/filler material surface area) Most PreferableFiber Surface Treatment   1% 5% Mass Dosage Required (by mass of fillermaterial) Most Preferable Surface Treatment 0.002 cm³/m² 0.01 cm³/m²Material Volume Dosage Required (surface treatment materialvolume/filler material surface area)

However, the permeable composition may be comprised of more voluminoussurface treatment material having a lower specific gravity within alower surface area filler material or less voluminous surface treatmentmaterial having a higher specific gravity within a higher surface areafiller material Therefore, the preferable ranges of surface treatmentmaterial quantities may be broadened Accordingly, in the preferredembodiment, the general range of surface treatment material quantity isapproximately 0.00005 cm³ surface treatment material/m² of surface areaof filler material to 0.6 cm³ surface treatment material/m² of surfacearea of filler material. The preferable range of surface treatmentmaterial quantity is 0.0003 cm³ surface treatment material/m² of surfacearea of filler material to 0.3 cm³ surface treatment material/m² ofsurface area of filler material. The most preferable range of surfacetreatment material quantity is approximately 0.0005 cm³ surfacetreatment material/m² of surface area of filler material to 0.1 cm³surface treatment material/m² of surface area of filler material.

As indicated above, the permeable composition of the present inventionis comprised of an amount of a matrix material. In one aspect of theinvention, the matrix material is comprised of a substrate material anda carrier material. In a further aspect of the invention, the permeablecomposition including the matrix material is used in coating a substratematerial. Whether the matrix material is comprised of the substratematerial or used for coating the substrate material, the matrix materialacts as a carrier for the filler material. Specifically, the fillermaterial is dispersed throughout the matrix material. Further, thematrix material facilitates the control release mechanism of the presentinvention. By increasing or decreasing the thickness or dimensions ofthe permeable composition comprised of the matrix material, the “length”of the interfacial passageways formed around individual particles offiller material or contiguously arranged particles of filler material isalso increased or decreased. Therefore, the time required to degrade thesurface treatment material may be increased or decreased as thethickness or dimensions of the permeable composition are varied.

As indicated, the matrix material is comprised of a carrier material inone aspect of the invention. Further, in all aspects of the invention,the matrix material acts as a carrier. Thus, the matrix material, andthe carrier material, may be comprised of any organic, inorganic,natural or synthetic material or a combination thereof capable of actingas a carrier for the filler material and capable of facilitating theformation or enhancing the formation of the interfacial passageways. Forexample, suitable or preferred matrix materials and carrier materialsare comprised of one or a combination of (listed in no particularorder): polyurethane, polypropylene, polyethylene, latex, sulphur andresins. In the preferred embodiment, the matrix material is comprised ofsulphur. Accordingly, where the matrix material is comprised of acarrier material, the carrier material is comprised of sulphur

In the preferred embodiment the sulphur is preferably elemental sulphur,which is less expensive than chemically modified sulphur. Elementalsulphur also potentially offers more flexibility in designing thepermeable composition, since the relative instability of elementalsulphur in comparison with chemically modified sulphur may beadvantageous for avoiding the effects of “lock-off”. In the short term,the inclusion of the filler material throughout the elemental sulphurmatrix material will serve in the preferred embodiment to mechanicallyreinforce and physically stabilize the elemental sulphur, thuscounteracting some of the potential disadvantages of using a relativelyunstable matrix material.

The particular matrix material and carrier material selected will bedependent upon the desired properties of the permeable compositionand/or controlled release product and the intended application thereof.Matrix material properties, including carrier material properties, maybe governed by factors such as matrix material strength, permeability,cost and/or environmental/health acceptability. For example, sulphur isoften used for fertilizer applications due to its relatively low costand acceptability for eventual long-term degradation in he environment.

The thickness of the permeable composition, including the thickness ofany coating layer of the permeable composition, has been found to affectthe release control mechanism of the present invention. Any thickness ofpermeable composition, including any thickness of a coating layerthereof, capable of producing an end product having the desiredproperties may be utilized. However, the range of preferable thicknessesof permeable composition may be classified according to a general rangeand a preferable range as set out in Table 5. Although the ranges ofTable 5 may be generally applicable, the ranges have been found to beparticularly applicable in the preferred embodiment in which the fillermaterial is comprised of wollastonite, the matrix material is comprisedof sulphur and the surface treatment material is comprised ofnaphthalene sulphonate formaldehyde copolymer.

Further, the following ranges of thicknesses are particularly applicablewhere the permeable composition is applied to the substrate material ina coating layer. Specifically, the ranges set out in Table 5 areapproximate and have been calculated from the applied sulphur coatingweights, assuming a spherical coating substrate material with a diameterof 2.2 mm. Such a substrate material size is representative of many, butnot all, prilled or granulated fertilizers.

TABLE 5 Ranges of Thickness of the Permeable Composition Minimum MaximumValue Value General Weight of Permeable Composition 15% 30% Applied toSubstrate Material (%, by weight of coated product or substratematerial) General, Approximate Thickness Applied to 45 microns 90microns Substrate Material (microns) Preferable Weight of PermeableComposition 15% 25% Applied to Substrate Material (%, by weight ofcoated product or substrate material) Preferable Approximate Thickness45 microns 75 microns Applied to Substrate Material (microns)

In general, it is desirable to minimize the weight or thickness of thepermeable composition or coating layer for economic reasons. Matrixmaterials represent an additional material expense in production. Also,typically the value of the end product is directly related to the amountof valuable substrate material in the product, not the amount of matrixor carrier material (such as sulphur).

The invention may be utilized in other products, particularly coatedproducts such as those using polymer coatings (including polymer coatedfertilizers or pharmaceuticals) or very small granular substratematerials. In these applications, the coatings are generally appliedmuch more thinly than shown above in Table 5. Therefore, the preferableranges of thickness of a coating layer of the permeable composition maybe broadened. Accordingly, in the preferred embodiment, the generalrange of thickness of the coating layer is approximately 2 to 100microns and the preferable range of thickness of the coating layer is 20to 75 microns.

Where the matrix material is comprised of the substrate material (ratherthan applying the matrix material as a coating on the substratematerial), the dimensions of the permeable composition preferably rangefrom prill/granules of approximately 1 mm (or less) to 5 mm. However,the invention may also be used in much larger products such fertilizermacro-granules, tablets or briquettes. Such products may range in sizefrom 25 mm (or less) granules or tablets to 150 mm (or more) briquettes.

In the method aspect of the invention, the invention is directed at amethod for producing the permeable composition and a method forproducing the controlled release product. In either case, theapplication or product is first selected for use with the presentinvention. For example, as discussed above, suitable applications orproducts include those that require a cost-effective method of achievingcontrolled release properties (such as controlled release fertilizers).

Both of the methods include the steps for the production of thepermeable composition. Specifically, the method is comprised ofproviding an amount of a particulate filler material, wherein each ofthe particles of filler material is comprised of an external surface,and applying an amount of a degradable surface treatment material to theexternal surfaces of the particles of filler material to form surfacetreated particles of filler material. The properties and parameters ofthe filler material and the surface treatment material are preferably asdescribed above. Therefore, the filler material and the surfacetreatment material are selected according to their required or desiredproperties discussed previously Further, the selected surface treatmentmaterial is applied to the surface area of the selected filler materialat the required or desired amount or dosage as discussed previously,using any conventional or known mechanism or process suitable forapplying surface treatment materials to particle surfaces.

Further, the method for producing the permeable composition is furthercomprised of dispersing the surface treated particles of filler materialthroughout an amount of a matrix material to form the permeablecomposition such that interfacial passageways between the matrixmaterial and the external surfaces of the particles of filler materialare defined by the surface treatment material and such that degradableinterfaces between the matrix material and the externals surfaces of thefiller material are provided by the surface treatment material. Theproperties and parameters of the matrix material are preferably asdescribed above.

The dispersal step may be performed in any manner and using anymechanism suitable for dispersing the surface treated particlesthroughout the matrix material. For instance, any compatible mixingprocess or mixing apparatus may be used. Preferably, the surface treatedparticles are substantially uniformly dispersed or mixed throughout thematrix material by the dispersing step. In the preferred embodiment, thesurface treated particles of filler material and the matrix material influid form (for example molten, emulsified, etc.) are mixed togetherusing known or conventional means, mechanisms or processes. Further, thesurface treated particles of filler material may undergo a pre-dispersalprocess or step where required to facilitate the subsequent dispersal ofthe particles in the matrix material. For instance, the surface treatedparticles of filler material may be pre-heated prior to the dispersingstep in order to facilitate mixing the filler material with athermoplastic or thermosetting matrix material.

In one aspect of the method for producing the permeable compositionwhere the matrix material is comprised of the substrate material, thedispersing step is further comprised of dispersing the surface treatedparticles of filler material throughout the substrate material. Theproperties and parameters of the substrate material are preferably asdescribed above. Further, the dispersal step may be performed in anymaimer and using any mechanism suitable for dispersing the surfacetreated particles of filler material throughout the matrix materialincluding the substrate material. For instance, any compatible mixingprocess or mixing apparatus may be used. Preferably, the surface treatedparticles are substantially uniformly dispersed or mixed throughout thesubstrate material by the dispersing step. Further, the substratematerial may undergo a pre-dispersal process or step where required tofacilitate the subsequent dispersal of the particles of filler materialin the substrate material. For instance, the substrate material may bepre-heated prior to the dispersing step in order to facilitate dispersalof the substrate material within the thermoplastic or thermosettingmatrix material.

Finally, in this aspect of the method for producing the permeablecomposition, the method is preferably further comprised of the step offorming the permeable composition into discrete particles. The permeablecomposition may be formed into discrete particles having any desireddimensions or configuration using any known or conventional processes ormechanisms suitable or compatible for use with the particular permeablecomposition. For instance, the discrete particles of permeablecomposition may be formed by such techniques as prilling, granulating orextrusion.

In a further aspect of the method for producing the permeablecomposition where the matrix material is not comprised of the substratematerial, the method may be further comprised of the step of applyingthe permeable composition to a substrate material in a coating layer.With respect to the method for producing a controlled release product,the method is comprised of the steps of providing the amount of theparticulate filler material, applying the amount of the degradablesurface treatment material to the external surfaces of the particles offiller material and dispersing the surface treated particles of fillermaterial throughout the amount of the matrix material to form thepermeable composition, all as described above. However, the method forproducing the controlled release product is further comprised of thesteps of providing a substrate material and applying the permeablecomposition to the substrate material in a coating layer to form thecontrolled release product. In either method, the properties andparameters of the substrate material and the coating layer arepreferably as described above.

The permeable composition may be applied to the substrate material in acoating layer using any known or conventional processes or mechanismssuitable or compatible for use with the particular permeable compositionand capable of achieving the desired coating layer. For instance, thecoating layer may be applied using conventional techniques such asatomized coating applications.

Further, where applying a coating layer, the substrate material mayundergo a pre-application process or step where required to facilitatethe subsequent application of the permeable composition to the substratematerial. For instance, the substrate material may be pre-treated withan application of a primer material selected to promote or facilitatethe later adhesion of the coating layer of permeable composition to thesubstrate material.

Finally, with respect both the method for producing the permeablecomposition and the method for producing the controlled release product,the methods may further include additional processing steps, wheredesired or required, to achieve or produce the desired end product. Forinstance, the composition or the product may be subjected to cooling orcuring steps or additional materials may be applied as further coatings.

A detailed description is provided below of the preferred embodiment ofthe invention in the production of sulphur coated fertilizers (SCF). SCFwas selected as an example of the application of the invention giventhat conventional SCF tends to be a high-value, high volume product,which typically lacks the ability to achieve reliable, significantrelease control in a cost-effective fashion. Traditionally, releasecontrol in SCF is achieved via the application of costly polymercoatings applied over the primary sulphur coating or the use ofexpensive, chemical sulphur modifiers (sulphur plasticizers orstabilizers), which often posses only limited performance. Additionally,conventional SCF tends not to be mechanically durable, and thus hasunreliable release properties.

In the preferred embodiment, the filler material is comprised ofwollastonite (calcium metasilicate) for several reasons. First, therelatively high particle strength and high particle aspect ratiosprovide excellent reinforcement of a sulphur matrix. Significantvariability in wollastonite particle size, aspect ratio and surface areaalso provides capacity for relatively significant release control andformation of interfacial passageways. Second, wollastonite hasrelatively high thermal stability, which makes it suitable for use insulphur matrices, which are applied in molten form at temperatures inthe approximately 130 to 160° C. temperature range. Third, wollastonitematerial cost is compatible with the economics of the production.Finally, wollastonite is an inert mineral, which is acceptable for usein agricultural applications.

Further, in the preferred embodiment, the surface treatment material forthe wollastonite is comprised of a naphthalene sulphonate formaldehydecopolymer (nsf copolymer), in aqueous solution. Nsf copolymer wasselected as the surface treatment material for several reasons. First,nsf copolymer is hydrophilic and water soluble, and is, therefore,degradable (soluble) in the presence of the fertilizer releasing agent(water). Nsf copolymer also effectively improves wollastonite particledispersion in molten sulphur. Second, nsf copolymer is substantiallystable at the temperatures used to apply molten sulphur coatings tofertilizers. Third, nsf copolymer material cost is compatible with theeconomics of SCF production. Finally, the use of nsf copolymer isaccepted in agricultural applications.

In the preferred embodiment, the nsf copolymer is applied to theexternal surfaces of the particles of wollastonite filler material usingthe following process regime. First, the wollastonite is pre-heated inorder to facilitate a nsf copolymer coating over substantially theentire surface area of the wollastonite particles. The wollastonite ispreferably pre-heated to a temperature range of about 60 to 90° C. (mostpreferably about 70–80° C.). Second, the surface treatment material, ornsf copolymer, is also pre-heated. The required amount of nsf copolymer,in aqueous solution and in the dosages discussed previously, ispreferably heated to a temperature range of about 50–70° C. (mostpreferably about 60 to 70° C.). Water may be added to the nsf copolymersolution in order to dilute the surface treatment material, therebyfacilitating complete coverage of the wollastonite particles.

Third, in a suitable surface treatment mixer/agitator, the pre-heatedwollastonite is sprayed with the heated surface treatment materialsolution and subjected to high-shear mixing. Suitable surface treatmentagitators (such as pugmills, ribbon mixers, etc) are utilized.Agitation/mixing action must be sufficient to disperse the surfacetreatment material or nsf copolymer over the surface area of thewollastonite particles, however the agitation action must not be sointense as to damage or break the wollastonite particles. In thepreferred embodiment, this was accomplished using a 1 kg capacity,table-top, rotating paddle-mixer with an agitation speed ranging fromabout 60 to 150 rpm (preferably about 90 to 120 rpm). The mixture ofwollastonite and nsf copolymer is agitated for approximately 15 to 30minutes. The mixture temperature is maintained in the temperature rangeof about 50 to 70° C. during the surface treatment process.

Fourth, the surface treated wollastonite is removed from theagitator/mixer and allowed to air-dry under ambient conditions forapproximately 24 hours. The wollastonite is thinly spread-out andperiodically agitated by hand, during drying. Finally, as the surfacetreatment solution dries, the wollastonite particles may becomeagglomerated. In order to break-up any particle clusters, the driedsurface treated wollastonite particles are agitated with a paddle mixerat approximately 60 rpm for approximately 10 minutes.

Once the permeable composition is prepared as described above, thepreferred embodiment of the controlled release product is prepared asfollows. First, the substrate material or fertilizer granules areprepared by pre-heating them to a temperature range of about 70–90° C.(preferably approximately 80° C.). Further, if necessary, fertilizerpriming may be performed. In order to improve or facilitate bondingbetween the premeable composition (sulphur/surface treated particles ofwollastonite) and the substrate material (fertilizer granules), thefertilizer granules may be “primed” (i.e.: coated) with a relativelythin layer of elemental sulphur. The molten elemental sulphur possessesa lower viscosity than the molten sulphur/surface treated wollastoniteparticle mixture and, therefore, tends to adhere better to thefertilizer substrate. The elemental sulphur primer may be applied in lowquantities of about 2 to 10%, by weight of the final, coated fertilizerproduct or controlled release product (preferably 4 to 7%, by weight ofthe final fertilizer coated product). The coating regime for elementalsulphur “priming” is the same as that described below for theapplication of the coating layer of the permeable composition to thesubstrate material.

Second, the surface treated particles of wollastonite filler materialare pre-heated in order to facilitate mixing of the surface treatedwollastonite particles with molten sulphur matrix material. The surfacetreated wollastonite particles are pre-heated to a temperature in arange of about 130 to 145° C.

Third, the pre-heated, surface treated wollastonite is added to themolten sulphur at the required quantity, ass discussed previously. Thewollastonite particles and sulphur may be mixed together using anyconventional high-shear mixing means (such as pneumatic agitators).Mixing is preferably performed until the wollastonite is substantiallyfully dispersed and a substantially homogeneous mixture is achieved.

Fourth, a coating layer of the permeable composition (sulphur/surfacetreated wollastonite particles) is applied to the substrate material.The application of the sulphur/surface treated wollastonite particlecoating to the fertilizer substrate is consistent with conventional orknown techniques for applying elemental sulphur coatings to fertilizers.However, adjustments to the conventional sulphur coating regime aretypically required due to the presence of the wollastonite particles inthe coatings mixture. The following coating application processdescription is applicable to the application of sulphur/surface treatedwollastonite particle coatings to fertilizer granules.

Using any conventional granule fluidizing means (such as a rotatingdrum), the fertilizer granules are fluidized (i.e.: a moving bed, sheet,etc of fertilizer granules is induced). The degree of granulefluidization must be sufficient to adequately expose the discretefertilizer granules to an applied coating mixture spray. The coatingmixture is then delivered to the fertilizer granules. In particular, themolten sulphur/surface treated wollastonite mixture is pumped viaconventional means to a series of conventional, fluid atomizing nozzles.The nozzles are equipped with sufficient orifice size and mechanicalclean-out capabilities (i.e.: orifice needles) to prevent or inhibitplugging of the nozzles by the wollastonite particles.

Via the atomizing nozzles, the molten sulphur/surface treatedwollastonite coating mixture fluid stream is contacted with atomizingair at a sufficient flow rate and pressure to atomize (produce discretedroplets) the coating mixture fluid stream. The air must also be heatedto prevent freezing of the molten coating mixture fluid stream duringatomizing. As the molten, atomized coating mixture droplets are sprayedfrom the atomizing nozzles, they strike the fluidized granule bed andspread over the surface of the discrete fertilizer granules beforefreezing. As a system of atomized coating mixture droplets coalesce andfreeze on the the granule surface, a uniform sulphur/surface treatedwollastonite coating is formed.

The following detailed coating application regime, as set out in Table6, is applicable to bench-scale production of the preferred embodimentof the controlled release product of the within invention having asulphur/surface treated wollastonite coating.

TABLE 6 Bench Scale Process Regime for the Application ofSulphur/Surface Treated Wollastonite Coatings to Fertilizer GranulesSpecific Regime Regime General Regime Parameters Variables VariableValue Fertilizer Granule Fertilizer Amount 5 kg Fluidizing FluidizingDrum Length 3 ft. Fluidizing Drum Diameter 2 ft. Fluidizing DrumRotation  20 to 50 rpm Speed Coating Mixture Delivery Coating MixtureFlowrate  2 to 6 gph Coating Mixture Flow  10 to 30 psi Pressure CoatingMixture 140 to 160° C. Temperature Coating Mixture Atomizing AtomizingAir Flowrate  1 to 5 cfm Atomizing Air Flow  20 to 70 psi PressureAtomizing Air Flow 140 to 170° C. Temperature

Once the permeable composition coating layer is applied, the controlledrelease product may be cooled using conventional air cooling means.Further, although not required, additional coatings may be applied overthe permeable composition coating layer, such as polymeric sealants. Ifdesired, such additional coatings may be applied for the purpose ofadditional release control, product coloration, etc

Test Results

EXAMPLE ONE

Various tests have been conducted on the preferred embodiment of thecontrolled release product of the present invention, includingassessments of durability, controlled release characteristics anddispersal. Test results related to these technological elements arepresented, following a description of the test specimen preparation.

In order to facilitate analysis, the specimens in Example 1 wereprepared as “macro-granules” having a granule size larger than typicalfertilizers.

Test Specimen Preparation Procedure

The test specimens are prepared as follows:

-   1. Urea specimens 13 mm in diameter are cast from molten urea,    cooled and weighed. The surfaces of the specimens are inspected to    ensure no significant defects (i.e.: holes, dents, etc.) are    present.-   2. Coating additives are heated to approximately 140° C., prior to    mixing with sulphur at 130–140° C. The mix temperature is adjusted    to 135–140° C., if necessary.-   3. The cooled urea specimens are dipped in the coating mixture.-   4. The coated specimens are cooled, weighed and the % coating weight    is calculated:

${{\%\mspace{20mu}{Coating}\mspace{20mu}{Weight}} = {\frac{{mass}\mspace{14mu}{of}\mspace{14mu}{coating}}{{{mass}\mspace{14mu}{of}\mspace{14mu}{coating}} + {{mass}\mspace{14mu}{of}\mspace{20mu}{urea}}} \times 100}}\mspace{11mu}$

-   5. Test coats are performed prior to specimen coating to ensure the    amount of coating additive results in an average % coating weight    between 20–22%. The applied coating weight is determined by the    viscosity of the coating mix. Holding the sulphur temperature    constant, the amount of coating additive is adjusted to ensure the    coating weight is consistent for all test groups.-   6. Those specimens possessing a % coating weight outside a range of    19–25% are rejected.    Durability Testing

The durability testing was performed as follows:

-   1. Five coated specimens are weighed.-   2. The specimens are added to the durability tester, which consists    of a shaker capable of holding the samples and a ceramic impact    charge. The mass ratio of impact charge to specimens is 42:1.-   3. The specimens are shaken for 10 minutes, thereby subjecting the    coatings to violent collisions with the ceramic impact charge.-   4. The urea specimens and any coating remaining on the specimens are    weighed. The specimens are inspected to ensure no significant loss    of urea substrate has occurred and the % coating loss is calculated:

${\%\mspace{25mu}{Coating}\mspace{25mu}{Loss}} = {\frac{{{initial}\mspace{31mu}{mass}\mspace{20mu}{of}\mspace{20mu}{specimens}} - {{mass}\mspace{20mu}{of}\mspace{20mu}{specimens}\mspace{20mu}{after}\mspace{20mu}{test}}}{{initial}\mspace{25mu}{mass}\mspace{20mu}{of}\mspace{20mu}{coating}\mspace{20mu}{on}\mspace{20mu}{specimens}} \times 100}$

In addition to a control test of specimens coated with pure sulphur,durability testing for Example 1 was conducted on specimens coated withsulphur and non-fibrous fillers, and specimens coated with sulphur andfibrous fillers, as set out in Table 7.

TABLE 7 Durability Testing Program Coating Coating Inclusion ContentTest # Inclusion In Coating (%, by weight of sulphur) 1 None NotApplicable (control sulphur coat) 2 Fine Silica Sand  15% (Non-Fiber) 3Ground Expanded Shale  15% (Non-Fiber) 4 Powdered Carbon  15%(Non-Fiber) 5 Wollastonite  15% (Fiber) 6 Muscovite Mica   12%* (Fiberor Plate) 7 Cellulose (w/kaolin)  2.5%* (Fiber)

In some cases less than 15%, by weight of sulphur, coating additiveresulted in the maximum permissible average coating weight of 22%. Suchtests are denoted with an asterisk. All test specimen sets possessedsimilar average coating weights in the 20 to 22% range.

FIG. 1 provides a graph of the durability test results for Example 1. Asis evident from the durability test results, fibrous filler materialinclusions improve the physical durability of sulphur based coatings. Ofthe fibrous filler materials tested to date, wollastonite inclusionswere found to induce the most substantial improvement in sulphur basedcoating durability. Therefore, it is observed that fibrous fillermaterials provide reinforcement of sulphur coatings.

Further, as is evident from the durability test results, the addition offibrous filler materials to sulphur based coating,s results in greatercoating durability than is possessed by those coatings containingnon-fibrous filler materials. Therefore, it is observed that fibrousfiller materials possess greater reinforcing properties than non-fibrousfiller materials (i.e.: materials without a particulate aspect ratio).

Release Control Testing

The release control testing was performed as follows:

-   1. Five coated specimens of known urea content are each placed in    200 ml of water at 15–20° C.-   2. After 4 hours of submersion each urea specimen is removed from    water and assessed for mass loss. The assessment involves    determining loss of the urea substrate (via dissolution) by pressing    on the coating Any specimens that rupture are dried and weighed. The    total % urea released is calculated:

${\%\mspace{20mu}{urea}\mspace{20mu}{released}} = {\frac{{{{inital}\mspace{31mu}{specimen}\mspace{25mu}{mass}} - {{ruptured}\mspace{25mu}{specimen}\mspace{20mu}{mass}}}{\mspace{20mu}\mspace{11mu}}}{{initial}\mspace{25mu}{urea}\mspace{20mu}{mass}} \times 100}$

-   3. Ruptured specimens are removed from the testing program.-   4. Remaining specimens are placed in water again and the amount of    urea release is assessed every 15 hours thereafter.

In agriculture applications, the releasing solvent is generally water.Therefore, for the purposes of controlled release testing, hydrophilicsubstances have been selected as appropriate surface treatmentmaterials. Based on positive coating durability results, controlledrelease testing has been conducted primarily on wollastonite. However, atest series for muscovite mica (KAl₃Si₃O₁₀(OH)₂) was also conducted inorder to verify the release control technique. Mica is comprised ofthin, alumino-silicate plates. The release control testing program forExample 1 is set out in Table 8.

TABLE 8 Release Control Testing Program Surface Treatment Filler DosageFiller Surface Dosage in Coating Material Treatment (%, by weight (%, byweight Test # Tested Material of filler) of sulphur) 8 None Not Not Not(control Applicable Applicable Applicable sulphur coat) 9 WollastoniteNone Not 15% Applicable 10 Wollastonite Sugar 2% 15% 11 WollastoniteSugar 5% 15% 12 Wollastonite Sugar 10% 15% 13 Wollastonite Sulphonate 2%15% 14 Wollastonite Sulphonate 5% 15% 15 Muscovite None Not  12%* MicaApplicable 16 Muscovite Aluminum 5%  12%* Mica Sulphate 17 MuscoviteAluminum 10%  12%* Mica Sulphate *Maximum filler content before 22%coating weight was exceeded.

Relating to Example 1:

-   1. FIG. 2 provides a graph of the release control test results for    the wollastonite sugar treatment series;-   2. FIG. 3 provides a graph of the release control test results for    the wollastonite sulphonate treatment series; and-   3. FIG. 4 provides a graph of the release control test results for    the muscovite mica aluminum sulphate treatment series.

Although FIG. 2, FIG. 3 and FIG. 4 are based upon somewhat limited data,a number of possible trends can be ascertained from the data.

First, as indicated by the Figures, specimens coated with sulphur anduntreated wollastonite or sulphur and untreated muscovite mica releasedurea much more slowly than specimens coated with pure sulphur.Therefore, it is observed that fibrous filler inclusions within sulphurare capable of physically stabilizing sulphur. By substantially reducingthe incidence and/or size of coating defects at the crystal level, theuncontrollable release mechanism employed by conventional sulphurcoatings (i.e.: the defects) is observed to be substantially reduced.The formation of defects at the crystal level is potentially minimizedvia further adjustment of the filler material content in the coating orpermeable composition.

Second, as indicated by the Figures, specimens coated with sulphur anduntreated wollastonite released urea at a different rate than specimenscoated with sulphur and untreated muscovite mica. Therefore, it isobserved that a degree of control over sulphur crystal imperfectionformation can be achieved via filler selection.

Third, as indicated by the Figures, specimens coated with a matrix ofsulphur and surface treated wollastonite released urea at a faster ratethan specimens coated with a matrix of sulphur and untreatedwollastonite. Therefore, it is observed that appropriate surfacetreatment of fibrous filler materials initiates interfacial passagewayformation and/or enhances existing interfacial passageways between thelongitudinal surface area of the filler particles and matrix material.

Fourth, as indicated by the Figures, specimens coated with sulphur andfibrous fillers with higher surface treatment dosages released urea at afaster rate than specimens coated with sulphur and fibrous fillers withlower surface treatment dosages. Therefore, it is observed thatadjustment of the surface treatment dosage provides a facet of controlover the release profile.

Fifth, as indicated in FIG. 4, specimens coated with a matrix of sulphurand surface treated muscovite mica released urea at a faster rate thanspecimens coated with a matrix of sulphur and untreated muscovite mica.FIG. 4 further suggests the potential significance of choice of fillermaterial, since muscovite mica arguably exhibits tendencies toward “lockoff” when incorporated into a permeable composition, in a similar mannerto wollastonite. This in turn suggests that different filler materialsmay require different designs for the permeable composition in order toachieve the same desired properties.

Filler Dispersion Testing

The filler dispersion testing for Example 1 was performed as follows:

-   1. During durability and release control testing specimen    preparation, the dispersal properties of the filler material in    molten sulphur were observed and qualitatively assessed.-   2. Filler dispersion was qualitatively rated as poor, fair, good or    very good.

Filler dispersal assessments were conducted on the fibrous fillerstested for release control, as set out above. The filler dispersion testresults for Example 1 are set out in Table 9.

TABLE 9 Qualitative Assessment of Filler material Dispersal in SulphurFiller Surface Surface Treatment Test Material Treatment Dosage (%, byweight Dispersal # Tested Material of filler material) Rating 18Wollastonite None Not Poor Applicable 19 Wollastonite Sugar 2% Poor 20Wollastonite Sugar 5% Fair 21 Wollastonite Sugar 10% Fair 22Wollastonite Sulphonate 2% Good 23 Wollastonite Sulphonate 5% Very Good24 Muscovite None Not Good Mica Applicable 25 Muscovite Aluminum 5% VeryGood Mica Sulphate 26 Muscovite Aluminum 10% Very Good Mica Sulphate

First, as is evident from the dispersal assessment, untreated muscovitemica possessed better dispersal properties in sulphur than untreatedwollastonite. Therefore, it is observed that various fibrous fillerspossess differing dispersal properties in molten sulphur.

Second, as is evident from the dispersal assessment, various surfacetreatments (of similar dosages) imparted differing dispersal propertiesto wollastonite. Therefore, it is observed that surface treatmentmaterial selection can be used to improve the dispersal of treatedfibrous in molten sulphur.

Finally, as is evident from the dispersal assessment, surface treatedfiller dispersal properties in sulphur varied with surface treatmentdosage Therefore, it is observed the surface treatment dosage can beused to improve the dispersal of treated fillers in molten sulphur.

Test Results

EXAMPLE TWO

Urea is high-value, nitrogen fertilizer possessing the highest contentof nitrogen commonly commercially available in a solid, granular form(46% nitrogen, by weight). Utilizing the aforementioned inventionelements and invention process regime, the sulphur coated urea (SCU)product set out in Table 10 was produced on a bench-scale.

The SCU product of Example 2 was prepared having a granule sizecomparable with a typical fertilizer to facilitate comparison withtypical fertilizers.

TABLE 10 Example Composition of SCU Product Produced CompositionParameter Composition Parameter Value Fertilizer Substrate Utilized UreaQuantity of Sulphur Primer Utilized  5%, by total weight of coatedproduct Quantity of Sulphur/Surface Treated 15%, by total weight ofWollastonite Coating Applied coated product Quantity of Surface TreatedWollastonite 15%, by weight of sulphur. in Coating WollastoniteParticles NYAD ® M 1250 Wollastonite Surface Treatment Material nfscopolymer Wollastonite Surface Treatment Material  3%, by weight ofDosage Wollastonite

The SCU product with the above composition was subjected to assessmentsof its controlled release properties and its mechanical durability Withregards to controlled release testing, the SCU product was testedrelative to a commercially assailable polymer coated urea product (PCU)(control). PCU products in general are among the best performing andhighest value controlled release fertilizer (CRF) products available onthe market. The PCU product tested possessed a “200 day release claim.”Such claims are typically established using field trials designed tomeasure the CRF's sustained releasing action under field conditions. Forthe purposes of this evaluation however, an accelerated laboratorytesting procedure was used to assess the release profile of the SCUproduct, relative to the 200 day release claim PCU product.

The controlled release testing results for Example 2 are provided inFIG. 5. The SCU product exhibited a nitrogen release profile close tothat of a substantially more expensive, commercially available PCUproduct with a 200 day release claim. Therefore, the ability of theinvention to produce a product with controlled release properties isverified.

With regards to mechanical durability, the SCU product's mechanicaldurability was assessed relative to two commercially available SCUproducts (controls). The SCU control products also possessed additionalproduct coatings over the primary sulphur coating, in the form ofpolymeric (wax) coatings.

The mechanical durability of the SCU products was assessed using alaboratory procedure, which subjects the SCU to abrasive handlingprocedures, as follows:

-   1. 100 g of fertilizer sample is dropped down an 11-ft PVC tube,    into a metal container The coated granules are subjected to violent    collisions with the walls of the container and each other.-   2. The sample drop is repeated 9 more times, for a total sample drop    of 10 times.-   3. 15 g of the mechanically stressed sample is then submersed in    15° C. water for 24 hours.-   4. The sample is then removed from the water, dried and weighed. The    mass of urea dissolved is used to calculate the % urea released,    after abrasion.

The mechanical durability test results for Example 2 are provided inFIG. 6 and Table 11 below

TABLE 11 Mechanical Durability Test Results % urea release % urearelease before abrasion after abrasion Description (%, by mass) (%, bymass) Commercial SCU No. 1 58 91 (with polymer wax overcoat) CommercialSCU No. 2 27 57 (with polymer wax overcoat) SCU (utilizing the within 1734 invention)

The SCU product produced with the invention exhibited superiormechanical durability, as compared to two commercially available SCUproducts possessing additional coating materials. Therefore, the abilityof the invention to produce a mechanically durable (i.e.: reliable)product with controlled release properties is verified.

Test Results

EXAMPLE THREE

Utilizing the sulphur coated urea (SCU) product described in Table 10above as a “control,” a number of factors potentially affecting thecontrolled release properties of the SCU product were varied as set outin Table 12 below. For each product described in Table 12, the primercoating weight was fixed at approximately 5%, by total weight of theproduct. Only the weight of the coating of the permeable composition wasreduced where indicated in Test #4.

The results of varying the factors on the controlled release propertiesof the SCU product of Example 3 are also set out in Table 12 and FIG. 7.

TABLE 12 Assessment of Release Control Factors Urea Surface ReleasedTreatment Coating after 1 day Wollastonite Material Weight (%, staticContent (%, Dosage (%, by total dissolution Test Description or byweight of by weight of weight of (%, by # Variable Tested sulphur)wollastonite) product) mass) 1 Control 15 3 20 17 2 Wollastonite Content 5 3 20 32 in Coating (decreased relative to control - test 1) 3 SurfaceTreatment 15 5 20 36 Material Dosage (increased relative to control -test 1) 4 Total Coating Weight 15 3 16 42 (i.e. thickness) (decreasedrelative to control - test 1)

1. A composition for providing a controlled release of a substratematerial, the composition comprising: (a) an amount of a matrixmaterial, wherein the matrix material is comprised of the substratematerial for release to a surrounding environment; (b) an amount of aparticulate fibrous filler material dispersed throughout the matrixmaterial such that the filler material is dispersed throughout thesubstrate material, wherein each of the particles of filler material iscomprised of an external surface; and (c) a water soluble surfacetreatment material applied to the external surfaces of the particles offiller material such that the surface treatment material providesdegradable interfaces between the matrix material and the externalsurfaces of the particles of filler material, and wherein the degradableinterfaces are degradable in the presence of water such that interfacialpassageways between the matrix material and the external surfaces of theparticles of filler material are formed by the dissolution of thesurface treatment material.
 2. The composition as claimed in claim 1wherein the matrix material is further comprised of a carrier material.3. The composition as claimed in claim 2 wherein the substrate materialis comprised of a fertilizer.
 4. The composition as claimed in claim 3wherein the carrier material is comprised of sulphur.
 5. The compositionas claimed in claim 4 wherein the filler material is comprised ofwollastonite.
 6. The composition as claimed in claim 3 wherein thesurface treatment material is comprised of a naphthalene sulphonateformaldehyde copolymer.
 7. The composition as claimed in claim 5 whereinthe wollastonite has an aspect ratio greater than
 1. 8. The compositionas claimed in claim 5 wherein the wollastonite has a particle width ofbetween about 3 microns and about 40 microns.
 9. The composition asclaimed in claim 5 wherein the wollastonite has a particle length ofbetween about 10 microns and about 600 microns.
 10. The composition asclaimed in claim 5 wherein the wollastonite has a particle surface areaof between about 1 m²/cm³ and about 15 m²/cm³.
 11. The composition asclaimed in claim 5 wherein the amount of surface treatment materialapplied to the external surfaces of the wollastonite is between about0.00005 cm³ of surface treatment material/m² of surface area ofwollastonite and about 0.6 cm³ of surface treatment material/m² ofsurface area of wollastonite.
 12. The composition as claimed in claim 5wherein the amount of wollastonite dispersed throughout the matrixmaterial is between about 0.5 percent and about 200 percent by volume ofwollastonite to volume of matrix material.
 13. The composition asclaimed in claim 1 wherein the matrix material is comprised of sulphur.14. The composition as claimed in claim 13 wherein the filler materialis comprised of wollastonite.
 15. The composition as claimed in claim 1wherein the surface treatment material is comprised of a naphthalenesulphonate formaldehyde copolymer.
 16. The composition as claimed inclaim 14 wherein the wollastonite has an aspect ratio greater than 1.17. The composition as claimed in claim 14 wherein the wollastonite hasa particle width of between about 3 microns and about 40 microns. 18.The composition as claimed in claim 14 wherein the wollastonite has aparticle length of between about 10 microns and about 600 microns. 19.The composition as claimed in claim 14 wherein the wollastonite has aparticle surface area of between about 1 m²/cm³ and about 15 m²/cm³. 20.The composition as claimed in claim 14 wherein the amount of surfacetreatment material applied to the external surfaces of the wollastoniteis between about 0.00005 cm³ of surface treatment material/m² of surfacearea of wollastonite and about 0.6 cm³ of surface treatment material/m²of surface area of wollastonite.
 21. The composition as claimed in claim14 wherein the amount of wollastonite dispersed throughout the matrixmaterial is between about 0.5 percent and about 200 percent by volume ofwollastonite to volume of matrix material.
 22. A method for producing acomposition for providing a controlled release of a substrate material,the method comprising the steps of: (a) providing an amount of aparticulate fibrous filler material, wherein each of the particles offiller material is comprised of an external surface; (b) applying anamount of a water soluble surface treatment material to the externalsurfaces of the particles of filler material to form surface treatedparticles of filler material; (c) providing an amount of a matrixmaterial, wherein the matrix material is comprised of the substratematerial for release to a surrounding environment; and (d) dispersingthe surface treated particles of filler material throughout the matrixmaterial such that the surface treated particles of filler material aredispersed throughout the substrate material to form the composition andsuch that degradable interfaces between the matrix material and theexternal surfaces of the particles of filler material are provided bythe surface treatment material, wherein the degradable interfaces aredegradable in the presence of water such that interfacial passagewaysbetween the matrix material and the external surfaces of the particlesof filler material are formed by the dissolution of the surfacetreatment material.
 23. The method as claimed in claim 22 wherein thematrix material is further comprised of a carrier material.
 24. Themethod as claimed in claim 23 wherein the substrate material iscomprised of a fertilizer.
 25. The method as claimed in claim 24 whereinthe carrier material is comprised of sulphur.
 26. The method as claimedin claim 25 wherein the filler material is comprised of wollastonite.27. The method as claimed in claim 24 wherein the surface treatmentmaterial is comprised of a naphthalene sulphonate formaldehydecopolymer.
 28. The method as claimed in claim 26 wherein thewollastonite has an aspect ratio greater than
 1. 29. The method asclaimed in claim 26 wherein the wollastonite has a particle width ofbetween about 3 microns and about 40 microns.
 30. The method as claimedin claim 26 wherein the wollastonite has a particle length of betweenabout 10 microns and about 600 microns.
 31. The method as claimed inclaim 26 wherein the wollastonite has a particle surface area of betweenabout 1 m²/cm³ and about 15 m²/cm³.
 32. The method as claimed in claim26 wherein the surface treatment material is applied to the externalsurfaces of the wollastonite such that the amount of surface treatmentmaterial is between about 0.00005 cm³ of surface treatment material/m²of surface area of wollastonite and about 0.6 cm³ of surface treatmentmaterial/m² of surface area of wollastonite.
 33. The method as claimedin claim 26 wherein the wollastonite is dispersed throughout the matrixmaterial such that the amount of wollastonite is between about 0.5percent and about 200 percent by volume of wollastonite to volume ofmatrix material.
 34. The method as claimed in claim 26, furthercomprising the step of forming the composition into discrete particles.35. The method as claimed in claim 22 wherein the matrix material iscomprised of sulphur.
 36. The method as claimed in claim 35 wherein thefiller material is comprised of wollastonite.
 37. The method as claimedin claim 22 wherein the surface treatment material is comprised of anaphthalene sulphonate formaldehyde copolymer.
 38. The method as claimedin claim 36 wherein the wollastonite has an aspect ratio greater than 1.39. The method as claimed in claim 36 wherein the wollastonite has aparticle width of between about 3 microns and about 40 microns.
 40. Themethod as claimed in claim 36 wherein the wollastonite has a particlelength of between about 10 microns and about 600 microns.
 41. The methodas claimed in claim 36 wherein the wollastonite has a particle surfacearea of between about 1 m²/cm³ and about 15 m²/cm³.
 42. The method asclaimed in claim 36 wherein the surface treatment material is applied tothe external surfaces of the wollastonite such that the amount ofsurface treatment material is between about 0.00005 cm³ of surfacetreatment material/m² of surface area of wollastonite and about 0.6 cm³of surface treatment material/m² of surface area of wollastonite. 43.The method as claimed in claim 36 wherein the wollastonite is dispersedthroughout the matrix material such that the amount of wollastonite isbetween about 0.5 percent and about 200 percent by volume ofwollastonite to volume of matrix material.